# Going on the Offensive



## Kenpo Yahoo (Aug 8, 2003)

Kenpo, for all practical purposes, is a defensive system.  This means that everything you do is, at least to an extent, reactionary.  So here is my question: Should kenpo be taught with an offensive component or should it be kept strictly defensive?  Please explain your answer.


----------



## tarabos (Aug 8, 2003)

i've always felt the offense is there if you want to see it. i mean, after the first block or other defensive move of a technique...the rest of it is offensive. theoretically, just take out the first block and you have yourself an offensive technique. now that's of course very general and wouldn't apply to every technique, especially some grab and lock defense techs.

granted, finer points of offense such as faking and using angles and footwork to your advantage is not really addressed directly by just "taking out the block." footwork is addressed in the techs, but setting up a strike isn't so much.

however, in most kenpo schools those "tricks of the trade" are taught and practiced in sparring class...but are not neccessarily part of the kenpo cirriculum.


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Aug 8, 2003)

> i've always felt the offense is there if you want to see it. i mean, after the first block or other defensive move of a technique...the rest of it is offensive.



This isn't exactly what I was talking about.  I am referring more to an offensive approach.  In other words, blitzing the guy before he moves.  Kenpo is reactionary, this already places you one step behind your attacker, yet most would agree that a fight will be won by the guy who lands the first punch.  So back to my original question:  Should Kenpo teach offensive strategies? If so, when and why?

Please don't take misunderstand the question, I am simply asking what others think and why.


----------



## tarabos (Aug 8, 2003)

are you referring to expanding your defense into offense?


----------



## theletch1 (Aug 8, 2003)

Certainly there are times when being able to go on the offensive would come in handy.  If you KNOW someone is about to attempt to waylay you then why wait until he has the opportunity to make the first strike.  If I remember my kenpo correctly, there are indeed at least some techs that could be construed as being offensive in nature.  I don't think kenpo should be taught as offensive from the get go but should be added at a higher level of training.  

(before any one decides to flame my response, I only had the pleasure of training in kenpo for 2 years so I'm sure there are 100 different angles that I've missed here.  Just my 2 cents worth.)


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Aug 8, 2003)

Anyone else?


----------



## clapping_tiger (Aug 8, 2003)

I think Kenpo schools should teach offensive techniques. The reason being that the fight begins long before the first punch is thrown. But I think aside from incorporating offensive moves and tactics, the student should learn to recognize the key events that lead to an attack. 

body language: Looking around to see if anyone is watching, "stretching", clenching and unclenching fists, ect.

Verbal: no matter what you say or do, he is still going to kick your butt and won't back off. Also things they say, "I'll rip you open", They may have a weapon so a preemptive strike may be the safest option. 

Intent: Does the person coming at you think whatever you did, or they think you did, is serious enough to beat you up. Does he have friends or a girl to impress?

All these things plus some would lead me to believe that I cannot talk my way out. I would want to strike first and leave first. But in Wisconsin you can do so legally, as long as you can prove to the police that you did everything in your power to escape the situation. Now all of this takes place only if you have no other way out, and/or the other person would not listen to your explanation.


----------



## clapping_tiger (Aug 8, 2003)

> _Originally posted by theletch1 _
> *Certainly there are times when being able to go on the offensive would come in handy.  If you KNOW someone is about to attempt to waylay you then why wait until he has the opportunity to make the first strike.  If I remember my kenpo correctly, there are indeed at least some techs that could be construed as being offensive in nature.  I don't think kenpo should be taught as offensive from the get go but should be added at a higher level of training.
> *



I agree.


----------



## Ceicei (Aug 8, 2003)

Should kenpo teach offensive approaches?


You're right, it is primarily defensive.  However, I believe kenpo is fluid enough to allow for adjusting techniques.  Given certain circumstances, I don't think there should be a problem with modifying moves when needed and going on the offense before the attack starts.

IMHO, most fight situations often give a "feel" that allows people to know something is gonna go down.  That's when we are supposed to get out.  But if getting out is not possible and you KNOW an attack will happen, why wait?  Striking first and getting out immediately might be the most viable way sometimes. 

:bomb: 

- Ceicei


----------



## Ginsu (Aug 8, 2003)

I would not say that Kenpo is reactionary. I believe how you think about it is how you will react. Simply because you have been taught to respond to a certain attack does not mean you have to wait to be attacked that way. 

If you decied to attack some with your Kenpo it could be done very easy and well with several techniques and any one of the fighting basics from B1a on. Sure there may have to be an alteration of a technique to attack but that is not always true.

The real question to ask is should I use my art to be offensive and when?

_Ginsu_ 

"In every offense there is defense and in every defense is an offense.*


----------



## kenpo2dabone (Aug 8, 2003)

I have been in two situations where I hit first. One I was leaving Lucky's after buying some fodd for the week and when I got to my truck there were two guys buy it that happened to ook pretty shady. i was able to put mu bags in the back of my truck when noe of them came around to complimnet me on my jacket and he thought he should own it. I curtiously told him how much it cost and where he could find one and he said how about if I just take yours. I decided right thter that i did not like where this was going and dropped into a wide kneel and drilled the guy in the soloplexis and the kicked him in the instep. Slapping Silk works pretty good at least I think that is the name of the technique if I remember correctly. His buddy had this strang look on his face and turnned around and ran away. To this day I feel that I escaped a pretty good beating. the other situation was my soccer team got in a fight with the other soccer team and bodies were everywhere so I hit anyone that had the other color jersey on that got close enough to hit me or one of my team mates. 

So, yes I think Kenpo should be taught to be offensive although I never really was. However, it was always implied...sort of. I think that it is usually pretty obvious when someone wants to harm you even if all they say they want is your jacket. i did love that jacket.

However, I think this mantaility should only be taught to adult students and especially woman as it can give them an advantage.


Salute,
Mike Miller


----------



## Atlanta-Kenpo (Aug 8, 2003)

I think if you will look a bit harder you will see that the kenpo freestyle techniques teach you how to be offensive.  So, the statement that kenpo needs to have offensive techniques is not really valid.  I have been working the teachniques with a partner lately and they have opened up a new area for me to learn and grow ( As if I did not have enough areas that I need to learn about and grow!).


----------



## Ender (Aug 8, 2003)

Kenpo is only defensive on the first move. skip over that first step and it's all offensive after that.


----------



## satans.barber (Aug 10, 2003)

I think it's important to teach offence from the perspective of pre-emptive striking. Since it's been clearly highlighted that (in Britain at least) there are instances when pre-emptive striking is acceptable (for example if you fear for you life, or you think you're about to come to serious harm) then you may be called upon to make the first (physical) move.

Ian.


----------



## Ceicei (Aug 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by satans.barber _
> *I think it's important to teach offence from the perspective of pre-emptive striking. Since it's been clearly highlighted that (in Britain at least) there are instances when pre-emptive striking is acceptable (for example if you fear for you life, or you think you're about to come to serious harm) then you may be called upon to make the first (physical) move.
> 
> Ian. *



Not sure if Britain really allows self defense.  I'm thinking of the situation of Tony Martain who was trying to defend his home with a gun from two burglars.  Tony was arrested and declared to "be a threat to burglars".  He served jaul time and when released, was sued by one of the burglars for inflicting injury.

- Ceicei


----------



## satans.barber (Aug 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ceicei _
> *Not sure if Britain really allows self defense.  I'm thinking of the situation of Tony Martain who was trying to defend his home with a gun from two burglars.  Tony was arrested and declared to "be a threat to burglars".  He served jaul time and when released, was sued by one of the burglars for inflicting injury.
> 
> - Ceicei *



Entirely different I'm afraid. The British judiciary system always puts life above property, they wanted to steal his property, he killed one of them, therefore he was in the wrong in the eyes of the law.

He wasn't even acting in self defence, he just came downstairs and shot them all, they didn't threaten him or anything.

That's not the same as breaking someone's nose if you think they're about to go psycho on you and knock some of your teeth out, IMHO.

Ian.


----------



## Ceicei (Aug 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by satans.barber _
> *Entirely different I'm afraid. The British judiciary system always puts life above property, they wanted to steal his property, he killed one of them, therefore he was in the wrong in the eyes of the law.
> 
> He wasn't even acting in self defence, he just came downstairs and shot them all, they didn't threaten him or anything.
> ...



Thanks for giving some additional details that I didn't know.  Appreciate it.

Many States in America do allow for "defense of castle" (defending against home break-ins), but that's an entirely different thread.

Let's return to going on the offense with martial arts.
- Ceicei


----------



## KenpoTess (Aug 11, 2003)

EPAK Orange belt Sayings:

#3.  In every offense there is a defense and in every defense is an offense.


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Aug 11, 2003)

Saying it is a lot different than teaching it!

So far most of you have given the text book response of in every defense there is an offense and if you take off the first block the rest is offensive, but how many of you focus on teaching your students the offensive applications of the techniques?  How to move into zones of obscurity and or sanctuary when no attack has been thrown? Targeting Priority? etc.


----------



## Eggman (Aug 11, 2003)

are you talking about just beating the crap out of someone?  I remember a seminar i had with mr hebler a few years back and he taught me something that has helped my offense dramatically.  In any situation put your hands up and say i dont want any trouble.  With my hands up I can normally make a move before the oppenent realizes whats happened.  I will always try to avoid confrotation but unfortunately it seems to come my way.


----------



## Michael Billings (Aug 11, 2003)

... but not until later in the student's training.  I introduce the idea of self-offense very early on, but do not train it until I have had enough time with the students to assess their moral character and personality.  By Purple, Blue, or Green - I have a good feel for the person, not just what they want me to see (hopefully.)  

This is good and bad.  I have lost students who are too aggressive, not without a bunch of warnings, counseling, or even in one case, a probationary period.  

You especially need to be judicious in teaching aggressive Kenpo to kids or UTES ('youths' - a joke from John Sepulveda's Spirit Camp in Idaho this weekend.)  You have to teach not just the "Way" to be offensive, rather how to be on the offensive, but the Perceptual, Psychological or Mental, and then address the "Hows".  

Of course we teach it ... I would hope all instructors do.  However, "do we practice it" is a question that begs an answer.  I see the vast majority of most Kenpoist training as being "reactive" as in a self-defense technique line - how often, outside of freestyle sparring, do we practice this?


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Aug 11, 2003)

No I'm not talking about just beating the crap out of somebody.  Damn......  Okay, sometimes you may be confronted in such a manner that if you wait for the attack in order to execute the APPROPRIATE technique you will get trashed by your opponent.  For instance Multiple Attacker scenarios.... Why the hell would you wait until someone attacks to start defending yourself?  However, it's not as simple as just hitting the guy.  You have to take into account whoever else might be with him,possible weapons, how to attack without exposing yourself to the other opponents.  How to maneuver and control an opponent to regulate range.  

Most fights are won by the guy who lands the first punch.  If a situation is immenant why wait for the attack?  You should have some strategy in mind in case these events occur.  Saying that offensive applications exist is a lot different than teaching a student to be offensive.  I'm not advocating that you teach students to kick the crap out of somebody just 'cause, rather to teach your students how to be offensive when the occasion arises.  Maybe I should just abandon the question, because no one seems to understand what I'm talking about.  Maybe I'm not explaining this right.


----------



## Kenpo Yahoo (Aug 11, 2003)

Thank you Mr. Billings, 

This was more of what I was looking for.


----------

