# Twin Kimonos



## Hrrikane (Oct 21, 2003)

When performing this techinque do you insert an inward raking hammer fist to the face after the the horizontal back knuckle strike to the ribs or do you just skip this and go straight to the clearing of the opponent's hands?


----------



## Elfan (Oct 21, 2003)

I do not.


----------



## Eggman (Oct 21, 2003)

yes, at least according to MR Planas.


----------



## Shodan (Oct 21, 2003)

Sure!!  Why not take it?  It's on the way!!

  :asian:  :karate:


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Oct 21, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Hrrikane _*
> When performing this techinque do you insert an inward raking hammer fist to the face after the the horizontal back knuckle strike to the ribs or do you just skip this and go straight to the clearing of the opponent's hands?
> *



Are you asking me personally or how I teach it?

:asian:


----------



## dcence (Oct 21, 2003)

> When performing this techinque do you insert an inward raking hammer fist to the face after the the horizontal back knuckle strike to the ribs or do you just skip this and go straight to the clearing of the opponent's hands?



Like so many things in Kenpo, if it is there take it, but don't go out of your way for it.  In this case you potentially bent them over with the backknuckle to the solar plexus (I prefer this to the ribs), and their head may be in a  good position to be hit.  You can strike the face with  the hammerfist (upper case) and the arms with  the forearm (lower case).  But if it isn't there I don't reach for it.

Derek


----------



## Sergio Jódar (Oct 21, 2003)

Yes you can do it. It´s only a sophysticated basic. I totally agree with Derek´s argument.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 21, 2003)

I wouldn't force the move if the head were not in position. If he has the presence of mind to turn his head away from your impending strike you are gonna rake your knuckles right across the back of his skull. So, my advice, for what its worth is to look before you leap and choose the best method at the time.
Sean


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 21, 2003)

My instructor has not asked to see this tech in about the last twenty years. I would have to ask his real reason, but he has us work "lone kimono" all the time. My theory is that he feels "Twin kimono" is just a variation of "lone Kimono". I'll ask next time I see him but who knows when that will be?
Sean


----------



## Hrrikane (Oct 22, 2003)

I would like to hear both, how you teach the technique and how you execute the technique.  My instructor has pretty much said the same thing as everybody else.  If it is there take it but be aware of how the opponent responds to the initial strikes.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Oct 22, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Hrrikane _*
> How you teach the technique?
> *



I teach the technique initially to the beginner without the (key word), "inserts".  I think the beginner has enough on his plate to learn the sequence first and to develop the coordination necessary at this level.  



> _Originally posted by Hrrikane _*
> How you execute the technique?
> *



As the student progresses..... you go back to older techniques and point out various little "tweaks", points, missed understandings or openings and develop the "on-going" development of knowledge of the student with all the techniques. 

These include many adjustments to..... Environment, Range, Position, Maneuvers, Targets, Natural Weapons & Covers or Defenses (during and after the confrontation).

At Orange Belt the student is introduced to the "Equation Formula", but I don't start "pressing" the -application- of this "option" until the Brown Belt Level and really emphasize all the possibilities and expansions that techniques develop, after the student reaches Black and then throughout the rest of his studies.  This is a never ending "what if" research and development area.



> _Originally posted by Hrrikane _*
> My instructor has pretty much said the same thing as everybody else.  If it is there take it but be aware of how the opponent responds to the initial strikes.
> *



I also agree with your instructor, that if an opportunity presents itself and the student can capitalize or utilize the opportunity....... then by all means take it (if recognized and capable), unless it detracts from the student reacting with a more comfortable and useable series that is effective.  

Inserts are just that..... INSERTS ..... options that CAN be used if the awareness of the executioner is keen and it is in the flow of the individual.  If not it can be a useless possibility and even a detrimental action if tried by an under developed student that is only trying to put tooooooo much [techno knowledge] into  the development of striking every target in a particular situation.

:asian:


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 22, 2003)

GD,                                                                                                    The question of inserting seems to be only an issue if you are attempting to adhere to a pattern. Targets  are the master key to sparring; so, not that your method is wrong, we would stress fighting aspect of the tech but limit the "inserting" or target taking, if you will, to the technique idea at hand. However our beginners are rarly asked to complete a whole technique idea. That is we stress the first few moves only. Yes I understand that this is not AK anymore but we make do. I will be training under Shaun Gants come december so I may come to be doing the more AK methods yet. 
Sean


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Oct 22, 2003)

> _Orig. posted by Touch'O'Death _*
> GD, The question of inserting seems to be only an issue if you are attempting to adhere to a pattern.
> Sean *



Well, the question was asked how "I" do this, and thus my answer.  As to what you have mentioned, yes, you are correct - inserting is a "tool" that was designed to "demonstrate" the ability to be able to recognize an opportunity and make such an adjustment in the teaching parameters we call our curriculum, nothing more - nothing less.  I am not a slave to the system but rather the reverse.  Kenpo offers a good road map and medium to train our principles, concepts and theories until you have the ability to respond extemporaneously effectively.



> _Orig. posted by Touch'O'Death _*
> Targets  are the master key to sparring...
> Sean *



Gee, I hate to disagree with you but........ Targets are hardly Master Keys to sparring...
(who sold you on that statement?)  they simply are  what they are..... TARGETS!  Whether you can hit them from the position you find yourself in at the time of attack is the question.  



> _Orig. posted by Touch'O'Death _*
> so, not that your method is wrong, we would stress fighting aspect of the tech but limit the "inserting" or target taking, if you will, to the technique idea at hand.
> Sean *



Great, I agree with you, my method is not wrong, likewise what you stress is equally a good method to practice as well (which we also do).



> _Orig. posted by Touch'O'Death _*
> However our beginners are rarely asked to complete a whole technique idea. That is we stress the first few moves only.
> Sean *



Each to his own, as we both know, the first few moves are the most important, regardless if you continue the technique or not.  I would prefer to drop the opponent on the first move if possible but....... but.... in the event I don't, we are "taught" {within the system} how to continue if something should go wrong, a move miss, or not be as effective on the opponent as anticipated.  

All Boxers dream of the knockout, however the smart ones realize that they never really know just when <<"that">> punch will occur, so they train combinations.  There have been several combinations started that could not be finished due to the KO of the 1st punch.... likewise there have been several definite KO's thrown that missed or had seemingly no effect on the person:shrug: !
So train hard make no excuses!




> _Orig. posted by Touch'O'Death _*
> Yes, I understand that this is not AK anymore but we make do.
> Sean *



It isn't???? Wow, you threw me again!



> _Orig. posted by Touch'O'Death _*
> I will be training under Shaun Gants come december so I may come to be doing the more AK methods yet.
> Sean *



Let's hope!
:asian:


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 23, 2003)

So the eight considerations you took time to write "are what they are" and are not master keys. Why consider them then?


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Oct 23, 2003)

> _Orig. posted by Touch'O'Death _*
> So the eight considerations you took time to write "are what they are" and are not master keys. Why consider them then?
> *



A little off Target aren't you?  I am not the one who said Targets were "Master Keys" YOU WERE, the these posts are not even about MASTER KEYS!  :rofl: 

<<My>> response to the 8 considerations was in direct response to the question "How I execute the technique", which "IS" the point of the thread, and I quote:



> _Orig. posted by Goldendragon _*
> As the student progresses..... you go back to older techniques and point out various little
> "tweaks", points, missed understandings, openings, and or "inserts" from the "Equation Formula" and develop the "on-going" development of knowledge of the student with all the techniques.
> 
> ...



I related to when I teach the "insert" and how it "could" be placed, during the course of a technique.

That's why I considered them then. 

:asian:


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 23, 2003)

So then you would also disagree that "position" is the master key to groundwork. It is what is is nothing more nothing less, that sort of thing huh?


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Oct 23, 2003)

> _Orig. posted by Touch'O'Death _
> *So then you would also disagree that "position" is the master key to groundwork. It is what is is nothing more nothing less, that sort of thing huh? *



Sorry,  I can't answer that, it is not on topic within this thread. 

:asian:


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 23, 2003)

Well thats just it, by my line of thinking, targets were on topic , but by your line of thinking they were not. By changing to another consideration I wanted to see if your logic followed, thats all, but we will just drop the topic, I suppose, it is your will.:shrug:


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Oct 23, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Touch'O'Death _
> *Well thats just it, by my line of thinking, targets were on topic , but by your line of thinking they were not. By changing to another consideration I wanted to see if your logic followed, thats all, but we will just drop the topic, I suppose, it is your will.:shrug: *



No need to drop it...... just start a new thread with your question.

thats all..


----------

