# Does this actaully work for Self Defense



## ziason (Sep 12, 2006)

I have been studing SKK for several years now in a local Villari School and I am currently a Blue Belt. I have to ask, Does this actually work for self defense? Some of the techniques I know can be effective, but a great deal of what I have seen, seems unpractical. In addition to my class training and seminars I have attended, I have the Villari DVD set White to Black Belt, and I must say it is not that impressive. It is all too choreographed. Many of the moves seem much too long and compilcated to be efective in a real fight. Since Villaris stresses that this is supposed to be self defense, I keep trying to evaluate what I'm being taught with a critical eye toward practical application, and many times it comes up short. I'd like to get some feedback from other people. Has anyone here ever actaully used any of this to defend themselves, and if so how well did it work?


----------



## Floating Egg (Sep 12, 2006)

I know very little about the martial art that you practice, but if I were you, I'd trust my instincts about the self-defense portion.


----------



## Drac (Sep 12, 2006)

If a technique is applied properly based on the type of attack it will work, reguardless WHAT system/discpline it is taken from...My 2 cents...


----------



## MJS (Sep 12, 2006)

ziason said:


> I have been studing SKK for several years now in a local Villari School and I am currently a Blue Belt. I have to ask, Does this actually work for self defense? Some of the techniques I know can be effective, but a great deal of what I have seen, seems unpractical. In addition to my class training and seminars I have attended, I have the Villari DVD set White to Black Belt, and I must say it is not that impressive. It is all too choreographed. Many of the moves seem much too long and compilcated to be efective in a real fight. Since Villaris stresses that this is supposed to be self defense, I keep trying to evaluate what I'm being taught with a critical eye toward practical application, and many times it comes up short. I'd like to get some feedback from other people. Has anyone here ever actaully used any of this to defend themselves, and if so how well did it work?


 
I trained in the Villari system up to Brown, before my instructor changed to Parker.  To answer your question: Yes, applied correctly, the techniques will work.  I think that in every system, you'll find at least a few techs. that will leave you wondering or perhaps, not wanting to do them.  Another thing to remember, is that these are instructional tapes, so of course, the entire tech. is going to be taught.  In a real situation, chances are, we may just get off a few moves.  

My suggestion would be to take a tech. and really start to break it down.  Having an understanding of the tech. is important.  You should also make sure you're adding in some resistance to your training.  If, during practice, your 'attacker' is just standing there, letting you do the moves, you're not really getting the best feel for the way the tech. will be applied under pressure.  

Mike


----------



## bill007 (Sep 12, 2006)

ziason said:


> I have been studing SKK for several years now in a local Villari School and I am currently a Blue Belt. I have to ask, Does this actually work for self defense? Some of the techniques I know can be effective, but a great deal of what I have seen, seems unpractical. In addition to my class training and seminars I have attended, I have the Villari DVD set White to Black Belt, and I must say it is not that impressive. It is all too choreographed. Many of the moves seem much too long and compilcated to be efective in a real fight. Since Villaris stresses that this is supposed to be self defense, I keep trying to evaluate what I'm being taught with a critical eye toward practical application, and many times it comes up short. I'd like to get some feedback from other people. Has anyone here ever actaully used any of this to defend themselves, and if so how well did it work?


 
Did you experience what is call the Dragon Circle?


----------



## ziason (Sep 12, 2006)

Yes, we use the dragon circle in training. Where are you leading?


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 12, 2006)

ziason said:


> Yes, we use the dragon circle in training. Where are you leading?


 
Well, do the techniques work for you in the Dragon Circle?  Only you can answer your question with some reality-based testing.

I think we have all asked ourselves the same question.


----------



## ziason (Sep 12, 2006)

MJS said:


> I trained in the Villari system up to Brown, before my instructor changed to Parker.  To answer your question: Yes, applied correctly, the techniques will work.  I think that in every system, you'll find at least a few techs. that will leave you wondering or perhaps, not wanting to do them.  Another thing to remember, is that these are instructional tapes, so of course, the entire tech. is going to be taught.  In a real situation, chances are, we may just get off a few moves.
> 
> My suggestion would be to take a tech. and really start to break it down.  Having an understanding of the tech. is important.  You should also make sure you're adding in some resistance to your training.  If, during practice, your 'attacker' is just standing there, letting you do the moves, you're not really getting the best feel for the way the tech. will be applied under pressure.
> 
> Mike


How does the Parker system compare? I find even in trying to use some of the techniques in sparring practice that I can only get part of it executed. They always emphasize timing and distance, and it seems in a real situation you don't have as much as you need of either to execute all the techniques. I have previous experience in the military in policing and security situations. I find some of the basic techniques familiar and practical, but then I learn something more advanced and I just have to stop and look and say, no way I'll ever be to accompl;ish all that in a real fight. It just seems more practical to learn all the basic elements and be able to apply them as the situation dictates rather than some long combination. Maybe I just don't see the whole picture yet, but I'm getting up there in years, and I want to be sure I'm not wasting my time mastering something that will fail me when I really need it. The thing with the videos that bothers me is that it's just to staged. I mean I have seen other people demonstrate things from other styles and it look like they are actually performing the technique, but in our classes and in the video it's more like ok, I'll kick you now and you fall here, etc. It just seems to me an effective technique should work wothout the opponents participation, in fact in spite of their resistance.


----------



## CTKempo Todd (Sep 12, 2006)

Yes and No...

A punch is a punch and a kick is a kick...develop them well

Now having said that, the techniques WILL work in parts not as a whole..

For example, combination 3..
This teaches you to get on the outside, timing for a straight right hand etc...VERY applicable in a self defense situation..
Will the rest of it fall into place like you practice?...No of course not..however chances are over the course of your training you will learn additional scenarios and positions that can be partially applied similiar to what combination 3 teaches you...

There are scenarios in the techniques taught in SKK that I simply do NOT like or agree with from the start...
The 'just fall down' part of combination 4...Why not learn an 'encourage fall down' move from combination 4...For example after the roundhouse kick, go right to a sweep with the same leg and finish accordingly..

Another example of something I do not like..Depending on the way it is taught..(I am going by the way I learned it)
Combination 2 or 5..the block and turning you entire body into a side horse stance and thereby blinding half you body away from the left the WILL be coming....TOO much of the right hand straight front punch stuff...Don't turn your body, incororate the hand checks that are so prevelant in EPAK and NOW you are good to go with a much more realistic scenario..

These are just my random thoughts and interpretations...They are welcome to be picked apart or questioned...this is how I learn..


It is VERY good that you are question things..it makes for a very good and knowledgeable student..

Best of Luck
Todd Guay
Ct Kempo and Fitness
South Meriden, CT


----------



## ziason (Sep 12, 2006)

HKphooey said:


> Well, do the techniques work for you in the Dragon Circle?  Only you can answer your question with some reality-based testing.
> 
> I think we have all asked ourselves the same question.


Well, the basic techniques like #6 and #7 combination work well enough, and the basic 8 point blocks are fine, but I find the more complicated and lengthy combos don't really work that well in dragon circle. As I say in my other post, the timing and distance elements both wind up being too short. I have also experienced this during testing when I paired against brown belts. They work at close range and offer basically no time to respond to an attack. I felt that was a VERY realistinc situation, but it left me wondering if I don't have the time or distance to make the technique work, then what good is it. I'm sure everyone has asked themselves the same questions, that was the reason for my post, I'm wondering what answers you came up with. Is there some way I can make the techniques work better by changeing something I am doing, or should I just throw out the ones that don't work in a pressure stuation. And if I have to throw out material, why learn it at all?


----------



## Drac (Sep 12, 2006)

CTKempo Todd said:


> Yes and No...
> 
> A punch is a punch and a kick is a kick...develop them well


 
Bravo...Well said...The basics are the foundation of any discipline...Learn them well..No need to get fancy to defend yourself...


----------



## CTKempo Todd (Sep 12, 2006)

Drac said:


> Bravo...Well said...The basics are the foundation of any discipline...Learn them well..No need to get fancy to defend yourself...


 

Thank you...

I try to develop MONSTER low simple basic stuff...hard and fast sid kick to the ribs...low roundhouse to the thighs.elbows to the heads...etc...
I don't kid myself..this is what I would do in a situation..no thing more or nothing less...

Combination 26 will stay in the closet when the time comes for a fight..


----------



## Drac (Sep 12, 2006)

CTKempo Todd said:


> Thank you...
> 
> I try to develop MONSTER low simple basic stuff...hard and fast sid kick to the ribs...low roundhouse to the thighs.elbows to the heads...etc...
> I don't kid myself..this is what I would do in a situation..no thing more or nothing less...
> ...


 
You're welcome...That's how I train the rookies in the academy *BASIC* kicks, punches...Lots of knee strikes and front snaps to the shin..If they show a gift than I'll show them some other techniques but that is only AFTER the master the basics...


----------



## ChineseKempoJerry (Sep 12, 2006)

I do not practice SKK and know little about it.  I just want to plug that sometimes the techniques are there for you to learn motion, not for the technique to continue as a whole.  Once you have sustained some type of muscle memory you can choose portions of a technique or the ones you have ingrained the best during the stress of a fight (fighting is not pretty).

I always remind my students, it is more the student than the system.  Fighting is fighting and has universal truths.  There are only so many ways to kick and to punch.  A system is a way to train or prepare for a fight.  Take your system and try to learn these universal truths.   You will see what you are learning can help you, but you have to decide.

I wish you well on your experience.

Sifu Jerry


----------



## cameypsaromatis (Sep 12, 2006)

Well said. I completely agree. Sometimes I think that when you have a very structured system of techniques, though there are many benefits, there are some adversities that come out of that.  I find that sometimes people, including myself, can't think out of the box. They are limited to this perfect attack situation or technique execution. I think you're right on the money with  the notion that the techniques are there to teach you motion and well pretty much everything you said.


ChineseKempoJerry said:


> I do not practice SKK and know little about it. I just want to plug that sometimes the techniques are there for you to learn motion, not for the technique to continue as a whole. Once you have sustained some type of muscle memory you can choose portions of a technique or the ones you have ingrained the best during the stress of a fight (fighting is not pretty).
> 
> I always remind my students, it is more the student than the system. Fighting is fighting and has universal truths. There are only so many ways to kick and to punch. A system is a way to train or prepare for a fight. Take your system and try to learn these universal truths. You will see what you are learning can help you, but you have to decide.
> 
> ...


----------



## carmstrong (Sep 12, 2006)

ziason said:


> How does the Parker system compare? I find even in trying to use some of the techniques in sparring practice that I can only get part of it executed.



There's a very important difference between sparring and doing a technique in a real self-defense situation. I'll use Ed Parker's Kenpo as an example since that's what I know best. The Parker techniques are designed to cause specific pain/damage at each stage of the technique and the attacker's reaction to that pain/damage sets up the next part of the technique and can cause some of the attacker's other possible weapons to be "checked" directly or the attacker is moved into a position that makes him unable to reach you with certain limbs.

In a sparring situation, you are not allowed to cause the damage/pain that the technique is counting on happening so that it can continue. So, obviously, if you try to do one of these fairly violent techniques while sparring, you can only use a little piece of it or use a few ideas from the technique, but you can't do the whole thing because the technique was designed to do damage that allows the next part of the technique to be possible.

I hope this helps you see it in a new way.

Chris


----------



## Kenpojujitsu3 (Sep 12, 2006)

Drac said:


> If a technique is applied properly based on the type of attack it will work, reguardless WHAT system/discpline it is taken from...My 2 cents...


 
I have to differ with you here.  When I was taking TKD there were some defenses against punches shown that involved knocking a punch out of the air with a crescent...

Strike 1 - No one throws a punch from that far away.

Strike 2 - Their fist is closer to your face than your foot is to their fist

Strike 3 - The arm moves way faster than the leg

and after three strikes you're out or should I say KTFO

There are some "self defense" techniques that are just downright flawed on multiple counts.  For the above example the physics of distance time and speed are against the first movement in everyway.


----------



## Drac (Sep 12, 2006)

I stand corrected....


----------



## MJS (Sep 12, 2006)

ziason said:


> How does the Parker system compare?


 
I prefer the Parker system.  For me, I feel that the various zones, ie: height, width, depth, were addressed better, as well as the checking and controlling principles.  It also seemed to go into more depth on the what if, even if phase.  A search online should yield some good results.  Here is a link to some American Kenpo techniques:

http://www.ltatum.com/TipOfTheWeek.html



> I find even in trying to use some of the techniques in sparring practice that I can only get part of it executed. They always emphasize timing and distance, and it seems in a real situation you don't have as much as you need of either to execute all the techniques. I have previous experience in the military in policing and security situations. I find some of the basic techniques familiar and practical, but then I learn something more advanced and I just have to stop and look and say, no way I'll ever be to accompl;ish all that in a real fight. It just seems more practical to learn all the basic elements and be able to apply them as the situation dictates rather than some long combination. Maybe I just don't see the whole picture yet, but I'm getting up there in years, and I want to be sure I'm not wasting my time mastering something that will fail me when I really need it. The thing with the videos that bothers me is that it's just to staged. I mean I have seen other people demonstrate things from other styles and it look like they are actually performing the technique, but in our classes and in the video it's more like ok, I'll kick you now and you fall here, etc. It just seems to me an effective technique should work wothout the opponents participation, in fact in spite of their resistance.


 
Pulling off a tech. during sparring is possible, but its not going to happen overnight.  Every teacher is going to teach differently, so it is possible that you're not getting what someone else is.  I have always felt that getting some resistance during the techs. is very important.  WE should be moving the person, not telling them where to fall, etc.

Please don't take anything I've said as a slam against Villari, SKK, or your school.  I credit my first school for setting me on my Martial Arts path.  If you're not happy with things, perhaps talking with your inst. about it, or looking at some other schools around your area, would be good.

Mike


----------



## ziason (Sep 12, 2006)

MJS said:


> I prefer the Parker system.  For me, I feel that the various zones, ie: height, width, depth, were addressed better, as well as the checking and controlling principles.  It also seemed to go into more depth on the what if, even if phase.  A search online should yield some good results.  Here is a link to some American Kenpo techniques:
> 
> http://www.ltatum.com/TipOfTheWeek.html
> 
> ...


I don't take anything you said as a slam, and I'm not trying to slam them either. I think my instructor is good, and the school is good too. I just want to be sure I get the most I can from what I'm learning. My goal is to really learn the material in a way I can actually use it, not just memorize it to the point I can display it, if you take my meaning.


----------



## MJS (Sep 12, 2006)

ziason said:


> I don't take anything you said as a slam, and I'm not trying to slam them either. I think my instructor is good, and the school is good too. I just want to be sure I get the most I can from what I'm learning. My goal is to really learn the material in a way I can actually use it, not just memorize it to the point I can display it, if you take my meaning.


 
I still get frustrated at times, when running through material with my instructor.  Just when I think I'm doing something right, he'll point out the smallest detail that I wasn't thinking about.  This is a good thing of course!  

I think that SKK has some great techs. and I've found myself still doing some in a tech. line.  Take one of the more advanced people at your school aside, and run through some of the material with them.  Really break down each tech. and really work the fine points of it.  It'll never hurt to get some feedback from some of the Brown Belts you were talking about.

Mike


----------



## bill007 (Sep 12, 2006)

ziason said:


> My goal is to really learn the material in a way I can actually use it, not just memorize it to the point I can display it, if you take my meaning.


 
Most of the Kempo punch techniques will work well in street s-d I think, they are quick hand techiques not too beautiful but effective, for the combination this is another story... if you ever do the no. 4 in real life I will be very surprise the guy wait for your axe kick in his jewel with  legs wide open, I'm arguing with my teacher for so many years about this one lol... I think it's more about to learn the principle than to execute all the tech, in fact who cares if you do it this way or that way in self-defense situation if you save your butt.


----------



## DavidCC (Sep 12, 2006)

ziason said:


> As I say in my other post, the timing and distance elements both wind up being too short. I have also experienced this during testing when I paired against brown belts. They work at close range and offer basically no time to respond to an attack. I felt that was a VERY realistinc situation, but it left me wondering if I don't have the time or distance to make the technique work, then what good is it.


 
Try attacking the exact same way agaisnt one of these browns and see how they deal with it.  And also, ask them about it.  You've GOt to control the depth of the encounter!


----------



## IWishToLearn (Sep 12, 2006)

Train...train...train...and once again...TRAIN!!  Key concept is positioning yourself - in kenpo what we call moving Up the Circle - we expose vulnerable points during our freestyle or technique applications while maintaining our own coverage - then exploit it to our benefit.


----------



## marlon (Sep 12, 2006)

Hello,
i want to state for the record the sytem works and is extremely effective.  How you are taught and how you train will impact your ability in a real confrontation big time.  I do not say that the techniques train motion but the do train muscle memory and flow.  Every time i find a combo / technique i do not like or think cannot work this is a flag for me to work it hard alone and with  a non cooperative partner.  Like the forms many things are to be learned and what you get into it is what you get out of it.  Let your instructor know that you want to be able to defend yourself with skk and perhaps he will show you some different ways of applying the knowledge.  I love it when the students ask these type of question and i generally believe that even if one is asking the question is in many minds.  If you have specific questions about a technique ask either to your instructor or here.  Also, remeber there are concepts being taught by the forms and the techniques as well, but they should work  (read Danjo's signature) and again you are still fairly new to the art...after 16 years of train i still feel new to the art.  Work and practice with your goals in mind and you will get what you are looking for, it is all there in shaolin kempo.  Lastly, kempo has been described as telephone booth boxing...it is mainly an inclose sytem...so try your techniques up close and personal and also see how thety are structured to get you there.

Respectfully,
marlon




ziason said:


> I have been studing SKK for several years now in a local Villari School and I am currently a Blue Belt. I have to ask, Does this actually work for self defense? Some of the techniques I know can be effective, but a great deal of what I have seen, seems unpractical. In addition to my class training and seminars I have attended, I have the Villari DVD set White to Black Belt, and I must say it is not that impressive. It is all too choreographed. Many of the moves seem much too long and compilcated to be efective in a real fight. Since Villaris stresses that this is supposed to be self defense, I keep trying to evaluate what I'm being taught with a critical eye toward practical application, and many times it comes up short. I'd like to get some feedback from other people. Has anyone here ever actaully used any of this to defend themselves, and if so how well did it work?


----------



## Doc (Sep 14, 2006)

ziason said:


> I have been studing SKK for several years now in a local Villari School and I am currently a Blue Belt. I have to ask, Does this actually work for self defense? Some of the techniques I know can be effective, but a great deal of what I have seen, seems unpractical. In addition to my class training and seminars I have attended, I have the Villari DVD set White to Black Belt, and I must say it is not that impressive. It is all too choreographed. Many of the moves seem much too long and compilcated to be efective in a real fight. Since Villaris stresses that this is supposed to be self defense, I keep trying to evaluate what I'm being taught with a critical eye toward practical application, and many times it comes up short. I'd like to get some feedback from other people. Has anyone here ever actaully used any of this to defend themselves, and if so how well did it work?



You're doing what you're supposed to do when it comes to your own butt. If a teacher has not demonstrated how YOU can make whatever functional for YOU, bail like your butts on fire. Don't believe the hocus pocus. If you have no faith and are not comfortable with something, you won't use it when threatened and stressed. I don't care who the teacher is.


----------



## Shotochem (Sep 15, 2006)

Doc said:


> You're doing what you're supposed to do when it comes to your own butt. If a teacher has not demonstrated how YOU can make whatever functional for YOU, bail like your butts on fire. Don't believe the hocus pocus. If you have no faith and are not comfortable with something, you won't use it when threatened and stressed. I don't care who the teacher is.


 
Excellent point.

Also, every technique is different for each individual.  I'm a little lacking in the height dept and I know there are many techniques that are difficult for me to use effectively.  It is not just Kempo or Shotokan which I also trained in.  You have to use what works for you.

There are many factors involved in every situation.

1) can you actually do the technique effectively ?   Alot of us older guys can't do stuff the same as a young flexible person.

2) What size is the attacker in relation to you.  If the attacker is too large or much stronger than you it may not work.  Use something different.

3) Look at your surroundings.  If the ground is slippery or you are in close quarters, you are limited in what you may be able to do.

With time and the proper training we all get better in knowing and understanding our strong and weak points.  This is when we really make our MA our own.
                                                                               -Marc-


----------



## Josh Oakley (Sep 15, 2006)

Kenpojujitsu3 said:


> I have to differ with you here. When I was taking TKD there were some defenses against punches shown that involved knocking a punch out of the air with a crescent...
> 
> Strike 1 - No one throws a punch from that far away.
> 
> ...



I have to differ based on my experience as well. I've been sparring (sans gear) with a group of friends from various disciplines for about five years now. One of these guys can indeed block almost any punch thrown at him; it's a key part of his defense. And none of us are slow punchers. In fact, one of us is Asa Rainey's kid, and grew up doing EPAK, and even he can only get in a punch on rare occasion. 

I would say it depends on the situation, timing, body style, and how well you have trained your kicks, as well as the target of the kick. 

And as far as no one throwing a punch from far away... on the street, you're often dealing with rank ameteurs, not highly trained kempokas. People do throw punches from far away. It's happened to me. It's happened to others. People do throw punches from that far away. Stupid people. But stupid people can still be dangerous.


----------



## Ray (Sep 15, 2006)

Josh Oakley said:


> ... on the street, you're often dealing with rank ameteurs, not highly trained kempokas.


Man, I hope so.

However, we should still expect plenty of people on the street who can fight well and are extremely well practiced. After all, all of us who think we're something special use the same streets as amateur and professional boxers do. Not to mention people who have trained in other ways. Every champion fighter was once a rank ameteur.

Last but not least, I recall an incident where a guy busted an old woman over the back of the head with a brick so he could steal her purse. If "thrust into darkness" is to work, you've got to know that the guy is coming.


----------



## Danjo (Sep 15, 2006)

While there are few techniques that will work perfectly on the street as is, IMO SKK combinations are unrealistic because they are all done off of Japanese Forward, Step-through punches. I have never seen someone in the street punch this way. When you try to adjust the techniques for a regular boxer's reverse punch/right cross etc., they don't retain their dojo effectiveness.

Bits and pieces can help you develop certain skills, but then one would probably do better to simply train those skills than learn the entire combination.

In terms of the basics, SKK is about as good as any Karate style if it's trained properly. That doesn't make SKK a bad martial art per se, but rather more like other traditional MAs like Shotokan etc. in terms of realistic application.


----------



## marlon (Sep 15, 2006)

., they don't retain their dojo effectiveness.

i definitely think this depends on how you train the techniques...no techiques look clean and smooth in reality.  skk techniques work at least as well as other systems.

Bits and pieces can help you develop certain skills, but then one would probably do better to simply train those skills than learn the entire combination.

teaching methodology...plus the combos trainined properly work effectively.

In terms of the basics, SK
K is about as good as any Karate style if it's trained properly. That doesn't make SKK a bad martial art per se, but rather more like other traditional MAs like Shotokan etc. in terms of realistic application.[/quote]

i have a few ex shotokan students and ex kyokushin students and we all can agree that skk is very different from these.


Respectfully,
marlon


----------



## Danjo (Sep 15, 2006)

marlon said:


> ., they don't retain their dojo effectiveness.
> 
> i definitely think this depends on how you train the techniques...no techiques look clean and smooth in reality. skk techniques work at least as well as other systems.
> 
> ...


 
What do you mean by "Properly"? Do you not train off a forward step-through punch with your combinations?


----------



## marlon (Sep 15, 2006)

initially the movements are learned off of a forward step through punch then after the movements are know they are to be executed agaist a 1- 2 punch then hook punches against as grab and a punch against being pull/ whipped around into a punch against kicks...and without knowing what is going to be thrown at you. Of course some will work better against certain attacks than others...It is like learning a form in the air, good methodology but incomplete until you can use it against a resisting attacker with a mind of thier own.  A combination is a mini form.  A form can be empty or full or overflowing and so can a combination or technique

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Danjo (Sep 16, 2006)

marlon said:


> initially the movements are learned off of a forward step through punch then after the movements are know they are to be executed agaist a 1- 2 punch then hook punches against as grab and a punch against being pull/ whipped around into a punch against kicks...and without knowing what is going to be thrown at you. Of course some will work better against certain attacks than others...It is like learning a form in the air, good methodology but incomplete until you can use it against a resisting attacker with a mind of thier own. A combination is a mini form. A form can be empty or full or overflowing and so can a combination or technique
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 
Well, it sounds like you guys are training pretty well then. Quite a bit different than how it was where I was at.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Sep 16, 2006)

Danjo said:


> What do you mean by "Properly"? Do you not train off a forward step-through punch with your combinations?



From the way I understand it in both Shaolin Kempo and Kung Fu San Soo, the step-through punch is more for the safety of the uke than anything else.I was shown slow motion a couple of the combos from Sansoo against someone punching with an alternate step, and they seemed like they'd be even more effective against someone alternately punching and stepping. Granted, I'vd never collapsed someone's knee while at the same time breaking his arm, then brought him into me and broke his neck in REAL life, but you can only get a certain amount of realism until you start losing training partners (and gaining time in jail).


----------



## Josh Oakley (Sep 16, 2006)

Ray said:


> Man, I hope so.
> 
> However, we should still expect plenty of people on the street who can fight well and are extremely well practiced. After all, all of us who think we're something special use the same streets as amateur and professional boxers do. Not to mention people who have trained in other ways. Every champion fighter was once a rank ameteur.
> 
> Last but not least, I recall an incident where a guy busted an old woman over the back of the head with a brick so he could steal her purse. If "thrust into darkness" is to work, you've got to know that the guy is coming.



I can't really think of ANY technique that works after you've been busted over the head with a brick.Hopefully I get at least some instant to know what's going on. If not... oh well. Martial artists aren't super-human. 

But generally, martial artists I know from multiple walks of life are trying to _avoid _fights, rather than start them. And I do the same. You're right, though. It is important not to think little of any adversary, because you just never know.


----------



## Carol (Sep 16, 2006)

How an art looks isn't a measure of it's effectiveness.  Pencak Silat has some of the oddest looking moves I've seen so far in MA.  It looks a bit goofy, until you are taken down by it.


----------



## Danjo (Sep 17, 2006)

Josh Oakley said:


> From the way I understand it in both Shaolin Kempo and Kung Fu San Soo, the step-through punch is more for the safety of the uke than anything else.I was shown slow motion a couple of the combos from Sansoo against someone punching with an alternate step, and they seemed like they'd be even more effective against someone alternately punching and stepping. Granted, I'vd never collapsed someone's knee while at the same time breaking his arm, then brought him into me and broke his neck in REAL life, but you can only get a certain amount of realism until you start losing training partners (and gaining time in jail).


 
Well, try doing combination #3 off of a boxer's reverse right cross and see where you end up, i.e., in a perfect position to get kneed in the face. It works because it assumes a karate forward punch. There are others, but I get your larger meaning.


----------



## marlon (Sep 17, 2006)

Danjo said:


> Well, try doing combination #3 off of a boxer's reverse right cross and see where you end up, i.e., in a perfect position to get kneed in the face. It works because it assumes a karate forward punch. There are others, but I get your larger meaning.


 
actually Danjo, i woldlike you to try #3 off of a boxer's right cross.  forget the block use that arm position as a guard (like boxer's do) drop and strike the groin (don't stay there) pop up and strike the head.  Itr can work well if you practice the distance and timing.  You can right hook punch into that guard if you like to give your uke something to think about then drop for the body shot then right hammer to strike or check the arm / mid body cancelling out certain weapons if your distance and body alignment are correct left strike at the head while slipping in close enough to control the spine with the sholulders and the neck...or you can do the whole technique with a fluid go-with-the-uke's-energy feel to it like aikido.  yes if you drop and strike low and stay there you can get hit with a knee but generally when anyone extends to strike another they are opening thier defense that is where timimng body alignment positioning and broken rhythm and misaligning uke ...etc comes into play.  A snapshot of any 'move' can be picked apart it is not the snapshot that makes it work it is the whole technique / bodty mechanics/ timing/ accuracy/ oppotunit /and training.  I would ask you again to take #3 and train/ work it for 2 weeks against that attack you mentioned and differing attacks and see what you find.

Respectfully,
Marlon
p.s. i am always looking for what is wrong with sk in order to improve my sk so these kind of discussions help me tremendously.  thank you and please keep bring things up


----------



## Danjo (Sep 17, 2006)

marlon said:


> actually Danjo, i woldlike you to try #3 off of a boxer's right cross. forget the block use that arm position as a guard (like boxer's do) drop and strike the groin (don't stay there) pop up and strike the head. Itr can work well if you practice the distance and timing. You can right hook punch into that guard if you like to give your uke something to think about then drop for the body shot then right hammer to strike or check the arm / mid body cancelling out certain weapons if your distance and body alignment are correct left strike at the head while slipping in close enough to control the spine with the sholulders and the neck...or you can do the whole technique with a fluid go-with-the-uke's-energy feel to it like aikido. yes if you drop and strike low and stay there you can get hit with a knee but generally when anyone extends to strike another they are opening thier defense that is where timimng body alignment positioning and broken rhythm and misaligning uke ...etc comes into play. A snapshot of any 'move' can be picked apart it is not the snapshot that makes it work it is the whole technique / bodty mechanics/ timing/ accuracy/ oppotunit /and training. I would ask you again to take #3 and train/ work it for 2 weeks against that attack you mentioned and differing attacks and see what you find.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon
> p.s. i am always looking for what is wrong with sk in order to improve my sk so these kind of discussions help me tremendously. thank you and please keep bring things up


 
Well, you can probably make something work if you tried hard enough. But, my point is why not train from a more realistic attack scenario to begin with? How many people are going to attack you in the street with a karate forward punch attack? Much more common to be hit with a right cross, so why not train that way?

I can understand the Okinawan and Japanese systems not training that way in order to maintain their traditional art intact, but why would an American martial art that is supposed to focus on street fighting not adjust itself accordingly? For that matter, why, if as some people claim, SKK is a distant relation to Kajukenbo, would they have dropped the defenses against a right cross etc. and opted to go back to a less realistic Karate type of attack in the first place?


----------



## jenngibbs2000 (Sep 17, 2006)

I think techniques and defensive maneuvers are intended to build muscle memory and then can be applied in whole, or more likely in part, during real world situations.

One of my training partners was attacked by a guy swinging a golf club like a side club.  He applied principles of a side-club kempo defense and was able to protect himself.

Also, real dragon circles, where opponents are genuinly punching in, are a great way to see if your instinct is to react with muscle memory or freeze trying to think what to do next.


----------



## marlon (Sep 17, 2006)

We have not dropped 'realistic' attacks we just build confidence and muscle memory first...then we up the stakes.  I have seen bad posture and basd habits persist because someone went too quickly to the realistic attack sequence before getting the proper technique and corrections and understanding.  i guess we want to end up in the same place Danjo, we just have differing training methodologies.. For the record if one keeps thier kempo at the step thru punch stage...this is not good kempo

Respectfully,
Marlon



Danjo said:


> Well, you can probably make something work if you tried hard enough. But, my point is why not train from a more realistic attack scenario to begin with? How many people are going to attack you in the street with a karate forward punch attack? Much more common to be hit with a right cross, so why not train that way?
> 
> I can understand the Okinawan and Japanese systems not training that way in order to maintain their traditional art intact, but why would an American martial art that is supposed to focus on street fighting not adjust itself accordingly? For that matter, why, if as some people claim, SKK is a distant relation to Kajukenbo, would they have dropped the defenses against a right cross etc. and opted to go back to a less realistic Karate type of attack in the first place?


----------



## Danjo (Sep 17, 2006)

marlon said:


> We have not dropped 'realistic' attacks we just build confidence and muscle memory first...then we up the stakes. I have seen bad posture and basd habits persist because someone went too quickly to the realistic attack sequence before getting the proper technique and corrections and understanding. i guess we want to end up in the same place Danjo, we just have differing training methodologies.. For the record if one keeps thier kempo at the step thru punch stage...this is not good kempo
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 
You're pre-supposing that correct form is only possible when starting from a classical Okinawan karate punch. Proper form in the basics is always what is needed, but one does not have to begin with an unrealistic approach in order to have good basics.

The idea that one should learn an unrealistic defense first before learning a realistic one is the opposite of a good idea IMO.

The picture I get from the scenario presented by jenngibbs2000 is slightly flawed as I don't remember the SKK club counters being done with clubs as long as golf clubs are. That would require a preliminary jump towards the opponent in order to do you technique. If that were something you had time for, it would mean that you had plenty of warning. Most club defenses are done with clubs the approximate size of a police baton from what I remember, and were designed to be able to be used against either clubs of that size and range down to a beer bottle size of "club" etc.

In either case, you're still talking about someone attacking you in a way consistant with how you trained. You're not talking about someone hitting you with a side swing when all you've been learning to defend against was a formal Samurai downward slash from someone holding a broom stick.


----------



## Danjo (Sep 17, 2006)

Carol Kaur said:


> How an art looks isn't a measure of it's effectiveness. Pencak Silat has some of the oddest looking moves I've seen so far in MA. It looks a bit goofy, until you are taken down by it.


 
Quite true. The question is this (and you'll have to answer it for me since I am unfamiliar with that particular art outside of magazine articles): Do the attacks they teach you to defend against resemble something you're likely to see in a real fight? If so, then it's a good way to train regardless of how it looks. If not, then the same argument applies, i.e., it's easy to look good if you're telling your opponent how to attack you. 

Defenses should be developed for what we are likely to encounter, not what we hope to encounter.


----------



## marlon (Sep 17, 2006)

i am not pre supposing anything...it has ben my experience that teaching students this way helps me to see some natural errors and helps them correct them and prepares them for differing attacks.  If you get down to it training with partners who respect you and like you is not realistic either.  but it is functional towards training learning and getting better.  Again, our methodologies differ i prefer the method i have with progressive development i feel it is the best way for me to help the student becomer good and able to defend against many different attacks.  The techniques and system work if taught properly.  i know you had a bad experience and so have i in the past.  You found your answer in another system i found mine within the system with a good instructor and developing a more realistic approach to training.

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Danjo (Sep 17, 2006)

marlon said:


> i am not pre supposing anything...it has ben my experience that teaching students this way helps me to see some natural errors and helps them correct them and prepares them for differing attacks. If you get down to it training with partners who respect you and like you is not realistic either. but it is functional towards training learning and getting better. Again, our methodologies differ i prefer the method i have with progressive development i feel it is the best way for me to help the student becomer good and able to defend against many different attacks. The techniques and system work if taught properly. i know you had a bad experience and so have i in the past. You found your answer in another system i found mine within the system with a good instructor and developing a more realistic approach to training.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 
No problem. Just bouncing ideas and observations off of you. BTW, I have tried the #3 combo the way you're saying and what I found was that if I bounced right up, they could still get you with the knee, but in the groin rather than the face.

See, the #3 combo has a couple of faults with it. 1st: it assumes a Karate forward punch attack. Second: it assumes that after you've hit the Uke in the groin, that he will still be standing upright waiting for you to pop-up and do the shoulder grab and takedown. They are both unrealistic scenarios. If the uke were to use a right cross, the groin wouldn't be in the same position for you initial strike. It would require a side hammer fist instead of the thrust punch. Secondly, if you DID hit him in the groin, then he'd fall forward too far for the second part of the technique to work. Third, assuming that the first two parts were somehow possible, his feet are in the wrong position for the shoulder grab and takedown. All of which goes back to my original contention: It is designed to work off of a Karate Forward punch, and assumes that the uke will still be upright after the groin strike. The same is true of the takedowns in all of the SKK combos. They all assume the forward stance in order to perform the hocks, sweeps and throws.


----------



## marlon (Sep 17, 2006)

Danjo said



Danjo said:


> No problem. Just bouncing ideas and observations off of you. BTW, I have tried the #3 combo the way you're saying and what I found was that if I bounced right up, they could still get you with the knee, but in the groin rather than the face.
> 
> i like you.  If you keep your feet set then yes you can get hit in the groin.  But if you follow the upward strike with your hips them you tend to slided to the side of the attacker.  also the strike to the groin is a front punch it can hit the groin the outer thigh or the inner thigh depending on the depth.  With proper body alignment you should not only bring the attack downwards but also move them off thier center.  Now the upward strike can be a back 2 knuckle but also a rising forearm or elbow without changing the motion of the combo.  Striking hard at the head should also move them back yo need to move with a control at the shoulder with a grip at the neck or opposite shoulder makes the twist takedown smooth and easy if thier feet are not in the right postition for you to make it easy as you slide in to maintain control you cxan sweep their foot towrads the rear (like a de ashi barai from judo).  None of this changes the movement of the combo. It takes less than 2 seconds to pull #3 off against a resisting attacker.
> 
> ...


----------



## Danjo (Sep 17, 2006)

marlon said:


> i like you. If you keep your feet set then yes you can get hit in the groin. But if you follow the upward strike with your hips them you tend to slided to the side of the attacker. also the strike to the groin is a front punch it can hit the groin the outer thigh or the inner thigh depending on the depth. With proper body alignment you should not only bring the attack downwards but also move them off thier center. Now the upward strike can be a back 2 knuckle but also a rising forearm or elbow without changing the motion of the combo. Striking hard at the head should also move them back yo need to move with a control at the shoulder with a grip at the neck or opposite shoulder makes the twist takedown smooth and easy if thier feet are not in the right postition for you to make it easy as you slide in to maintain control you cxan sweep their foot towrads the rear (like a de ashi barai from judo). None of this changes the movement of the combo. It takes less than 2 seconds to pull #3 off against a resisting attacker.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 
Well, it sounds like you alter and vary the combination enough to account for various difficulties I've encountered with it. You don't just stick with the party line if it isn't working for you. Take care,

Dan


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2006)

Danjo said:


> No problem. Just bouncing ideas and observations off of you. BTW, I have tried the #3 combo the way you're saying and what I found was that if I bounced right up, they could still get you with the knee, but in the groin rather than the face.
> 
> See, the #3 combo has a couple of faults with it. 1st: it assumes a Karate forward punch attack. Second: it assumes that after you've hit the Uke in the groin, that he will still be standing upright waiting for you to pop-up and do the shoulder grab and takedown. They are both unrealistic scenarios. If the uke were to use a right cross, the groin wouldn't be in the same position for you initial strike. It would require a side hammer fist instead of the thrust punch. Secondly, if you DID hit him in the groin, then he'd fall forward too far for the second part of the technique to work. Third, assuming that the first two parts were somehow possible, his feet are in the wrong position for the shoulder grab and takedown. All of which goes back to my original contention: It is designed to work off of a Karate Forward punch, and assumes that the uke will still be upright after the groin strike. The same is true of the takedowns in all of the SKK combos. They all assume the forward stance in order to perform the hocks, sweeps and throws.


 
Its been a while since I've run through this technique, but I learned it not by hitting the groin with the punch, but hitting the right side of the ribs.  Personally, I don't like to put myself in an awkward position to get a strike, so if it means making a slight adjustment, I'd rather do that.  

Thoughts?

Mike


----------



## Danjo (Sep 21, 2006)

MJS said:


> Its been a while since I've run through this technique, but I learned it not by hitting the groin with the punch, but hitting the right side of the ribs. Personally, I don't like to put myself in an awkward position to get a strike, so if it means making a slight adjustment, I'd rather do that.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Mike


 Well, that's sort of what I'm talking about. TEchniques aren't always going to be able to work as is in every circumstance, but they should come as close as possible in terms of being realistic to begin with. Now, I fully agree with what Doc has written in terms of not sacrificing the basics in order to inovate etc., but that doesn't mean that you don't actually formulate set techniques that come as close as possible to reality. 

One way to achieve this, IMO, is to have the attacker come at you in a realistic way. Look at how people tend to attack you and then create set techniques to deal with them. If one trains to defend against unrealistic attacks, then one's muscle memory will be out of whack in terms of what it is used to. A traditional Karate forward punch is very unlikely to be encountered in a real fight, so the question arises: Why train to defend against one? However, a boxer's right cross is much more likely to be encountered provided the attacker has a modicum of fighting skill. Hence, defenses designed to counter this attack are more useful. SKK, for some reason I haven't been able to fathom, stopped training their counters against the boxer's punch in favor of the Karate punch. I suspect it has to do with the limited curriculum that Pesare had when he left Gascon and the fact that he had to supplement it with TKD and other traditional martial arts to make a complete program.


----------



## DavidCC (Sep 21, 2006)

MJS said:


> Its been a while since I've run through this technique, but I learned it not by hitting the groin with the punch, but hitting the right side of the ribs. Personally, I don't like to put myself in an awkward position to get a strike, so if it means making a slight adjustment, I'd rather do that.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Mike


 
that's how it is taught at our school, to the ribs, for pretty much the reasons Danjo described.


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2006)

Danjo said:


> Well, that's sort of what I'm talking about. TEchniques aren't always going to be able to work as is in every circumstance, but they should come as close as possible in terms of being realistic to begin with. Now, I fully agree with what Doc has written in terms of not sacrificing the basics in order to inovate etc., but that doesn't mean that you don't actually formulate set techniques that come as close as possible to reality.
> 
> One way to achieve this, IMO, is to have the attacker come at you in a realistic way. Look at how people tend to attack you and then create set techniques to deal with them. If one trains to defend against unrealistic attacks, then one's muscle memory will be out of whack in terms of what it is used to. A traditional Karate forward punch is very unlikely to be encountered in a real fight, so the question arises: Why train to defend against one? However, a boxer's right cross is much more likely to be encountered provided the attacker has a modicum of fighting skill. Hence, defenses designed to counter this attack are more useful. SKK, for some reason I haven't been able to fathom, stopped training their counters against the boxer's punch in favor of the Karate punch. I suspect it has to do with the limited curriculum that Pesare had when he left Gascon and the fact that he had to supplement it with TKD and other traditional martial arts to make a complete program.


 
Agreed.


----------



## ziason (Sep 22, 2006)

Interestingly my teacher just decided he needed to address this very issue in class. I'm not sure if he got wind of the thread here or what, but he basically said you really just use whatever pieces of the techniques fit the situation and the point to the combinations, et all is just to train your body to react and apply without having to think about what to apply. I think I can accept that explaination.


----------



## Gufbal1982 (Nov 23, 2006)

ziason said:


> I have been studing SKK for several years now in a local Villari School and I am currently a Blue Belt. I have to ask, Does this actually work for self defense? Some of the techniques I know can be effective, but a great deal of what I have seen, seems unpractical. In addition to my class training and seminars I have attended, I have the Villari DVD set White to Black Belt, and I must say it is not that impressive. It is all too choreographed. Many of the moves seem much too long and compilcated to be efective in a real fight. Since Villaris stresses that this is supposed to be self defense, I keep trying to evaluate what I'm being taught with a critical eye toward practical application, and many times it comes up short. I'd like to get some feedback from other people. Has anyone here ever actaully used any of this to defend themselves, and if so how well did it work?


 
You gotta remember one thing..."combinations" or "dm's" are going to teach you a concept and not necessarilly something you would use in the street.  In fact, you may never use a complete technique.  I know I'm never using combination 14 in a fight...I think it's silly and I can't do a scissor's kick very high.  However, I'd still teach it because of the lesson that someone can gain from it.  Your job as a student is to think about the fighting concept that is being taught.  Take for instance combination 6.  You kick the person before the punch gets to you...right?  Yes.  So, what are we really learning?  We are learning TIMING.  I have put a lot of thought into this and that's what I think we learn from it.  Let's take another one...combination 2.  If you really think about it, there's a lot of circles in this combination.  what do we learn?  a law of kempo!  a circle can defeat a straight line.  There's so many more lessons from the techniques.  I used to make sure I told my students that they may never use a complete technique but they'll use the concept that they get out of the technique.  As you progress in the martial arts, you will learn different lessons from every single technique.  After almost 20 years of shaolin kempo, I still learn from combination 6 every single time I do it.


----------



## Gufbal1982 (Nov 23, 2006)

Danjo said:


> No problem. Just bouncing ideas and observations off of you. BTW, I have tried the #3 combo the way you're saying and what I found was that if I bounced right up, they could still get you with the knee, but in the groin rather than the face.
> 
> See, the #3 combo has a couple of faults with it. 1st: it assumes a Karate forward punch attack. Second: it assumes that after you've hit the Uke in the groin, that he will still be standing upright waiting for you to pop-up and do the shoulder grab and takedown. They are both unrealistic scenarios. If the uke were to use a right cross, the groin wouldn't be in the same position for you initial strike. It would require a side hammer fist instead of the thrust punch. Secondly, if you DID hit him in the groin, then he'd fall forward too far for the second part of the technique to work. Third, assuming that the first two parts were somehow possible, his feet are in the wrong position for the shoulder grab and takedown. All of which goes back to my original contention: It is designed to work off of a Karate Forward punch, and assumes that the uke will still be upright after the groin strike. The same is true of the takedowns in all of the SKK combos. They all assume the forward stance in order to perform the hocks, sweeps and throws.


 
Dan, if you remember, I used to say to punch them in the bladder.  None the less, you're right.  They do assume that you are going to be attacked by some uke from a karate dojo.  Really realistic, right?  same with the hocks, sweeps and throws.  It sucks that they teach like that.  SKK people should seriously branch out and take some classes to learn how to do those things properly.  Remember, SKK is sort of incomplete because you barely scratch the surface of techniques with it.  I branched out to study a lot of other styles and now I'm a much more well rounded fighter and I understand kempo better now than before.


----------



## shaolin ninja 4 (Nov 23, 2006)

DM three can work if you side glide to the side and and punch and block at the same time.


----------



## Danjo (Nov 24, 2006)

Gufbal1982 said:


> Dan, if you remember, I used to say to punch them in the bladder. None the less, you're right. They do assume that you are going to be attacked by some uke from a karate dojo. Really realistic, right? same with the hocks, sweeps and throws. It sucks that they teach like that. SKK people should seriously branch out and take some classes to learn how to do those things properly. Remember, SKK is sort of incomplete because you barely scratch the surface of techniques with it. I branched out to study a lot of other styles and now I'm a much more well rounded fighter and I understand kempo better now than before.


 
Yes, you gave us alternate targets to strike with that one (and some others). I always liked SKK interms of comparing it to Shotokan due to it's versatility. However, I do wish that they had more realistic attacks to counter.

You do realize that you were something of an anomaly in the USSD world don't you? It's the reason I quit when you left.


----------



## KempoFlow (Nov 24, 2006)

ziason said:


> I don't take anything you said as a slam, and I'm not trying to slam them either. I think my instructor is good, and the school is good too. I just want to be sure I get the most I can from what I'm learning. My goal is to really learn the material in a way I can actually use it, not just memorize it to the point I can display it, if you take my meaning.


From what I understand from my sensei is that it all starts to come together at the green belt level.  Up until then, you are really just learning the movements and learning to flow.  At green and above, you are then learning to put the power behind what you have already learned.

I do understand what you mean by some of the moves to be a little choreographed, but I trust sensei, and if she tells me that it will come together later I believe her.  She is quite amazing to watch.


----------



## Tenguru (Nov 24, 2006)

ziason said:


> I have been studing SKK for several years now in a local Villari School and I am currently a Blue Belt. I have to ask, Does this actually work for self defense? Some of the techniques I know can be effective, but a great deal of what I have seen, seems unpractical. In addition to my class training and seminars I have attended, I have the Villari DVD set White to Black Belt, and I must say it is not that impressive. It is all too choreographed. Many of the moves seem much too long and compilcated to be efective in a real fight. Since Villaris stresses that this is supposed to be self defense, I keep trying to evaluate what I'm being taught with a critical eye toward practical application, and many times it comes up short. I'd like to get some feedback from other people. Has anyone here ever actaully used any of this to defend themselves, and if so how well did it work?



No.  They don't work.
They are somewhat useful for learning body mechanics, though.


----------



## Hand Sword (Nov 25, 2006)

Hmm, a fight? You mean punching, kicking, grappling, blocking etc.., Nah, never seen any of that in SKK. (
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





)

All the systems work ladies and gentlemen. Again, for eternity, it's the practitioner, not the style.

To answer the original question, yes I Have used SKK for real, it worked just fine.


----------



## Danjo (Nov 26, 2006)

Hand Sword said:


> To answer the original question, yes I Have used SKK for real, it worked just fine.


 
For instance? (Not being confrontational, just curious).


----------



## marlon (Nov 26, 2006)

Danjo said:


> Yes, you gave us alternate targets to strike with that one (and some others). I always liked SKK interms of comparing it to Shotokan due to it's versatility. However, I do wish that they had more realistic attacks to counter.
> 
> You do realize that you were something of an anomaly in the USSD world don't you? It's the reason I quit when you left.


 

I think Danjo has a great point that i have addressed only indirectly.  We the students must work / test/ practice our supposed skills in as realistic a manner as possible. If your instructor is not doing this and you do not want to find another  or cannot then do it yourself.  I am sure you can find at least one other who thinks like you and get started.  This applies to all styles.  Make it work...it is your training after all not anyone else's.

BTW 3 works just fine if the attacker is bent over...it flows like aikido or it can stop start like some hawaiian kempo but it works

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Danjo (Nov 26, 2006)

marlon said:


> I think Danjo has a great point that i have addressed only indirectly. We the students must work / test/ practice our supposed skills in as realistic a manner as possible. If your instructor is not doing this and you do not want to find another or cannot then do it yourself. I am sure you can find at least one other who thinks like you and get started. This applies to all styles. Make it work...it is your training after all not anyone else's.
> 
> BTW 3 works just fine if the attacker is bent over...it flows like aikido or it can stop start like some hawaiian kempo but it works
> 
> ...


 
The only way I've been able to make it work properly off of a right-cross is to use the left hand to check the attacker's punch and hold onto it while executing the groin/bladder punch and then yanking the attacker by the arm into a modified right backfist over the arm into the temple. Otherwise, the attacker is in the wrong position for the follow-up moves.


----------



## Gufbal1982 (Nov 27, 2006)

Danjo said:


> Yes, you gave us alternate targets to strike with that one (and some others). I always liked SKK interms of comparing it to Shotokan due to it's versatility. However, I do wish that they had more realistic attacks to counter.
> 
> You do realize that you were something of an anomaly in the USSD world don't you? It's the reason I quit when you left.


 
It's also the reason why I left.  I gave too much and got nothing in return...no, I take that back.  They gave me an experience I will never forget.  I learned from it...grown...and all that mess.


----------



## Danjo (Nov 27, 2006)

Gufbal1982 said:


> It's also the reason why I left. I gave too much and got nothing in return...no, I take that back. They gave me an experience I will never forget. I learned from it...grown...and all that mess.


 
Your not becoming a buddha head are you?


----------



## Gufbal1982 (Nov 27, 2006)

Danjo said:


> Your not becoming a buddha head are you?


 

Ussd's version of a buddha head, yes.  Meaning, I will teach martial arts AND have a professional career.


----------



## Danjo (Nov 27, 2006)

Gufbal1982 said:


> Ussd's version of a buddha head, yes. Meaning, I will teach martial arts AND have a professional career.


 
Heretic!


----------



## RevIV (Nov 29, 2006)

Danjo said:


> The only way I've been able to make it work properly off of a right-cross is to use the left hand to check the attacker's punch and hold onto it while executing the groin/bladder punch and then yanking the attacker by the arm into a modified right backfist over the arm into the temple. Otherwise, the attacker is in the wrong position for the follow-up moves.


 
The way you are describing 3 is the way i have always done it.  If the control of the attacking arm is good enough you push the arm down bringing the head down a little with it into the Modified Back fist.  We also try to strike under the ear when we reach around for the take down.  All i can say is i am curious to some techniques and how most of the other branches of Kempo i have seen come from different attacks. Through searching i have found many techniques were meant originally to be taught off of the right cross, the 1 -2 punch, kicks and so on.  In my school we teach combination one off of a right front kick and then a right, left hook.  All we did was change some of the timing the rest of the technique is identical.  Also someone brought up Combo 4 - the original 4 brought over from SGM Pesare does not jump on the groin, face or shoulders.  After you blast the guy in the face with the kick you wait to see where he lands, run up the side of him drop your knee on his face or collar bone and strike the neck.  I was told this technique was created by Prof. Walter Godin.  Has anyone else heard this?  Things changed over the years for reasons only the people who changed them can know.  I see the next generation of SKK teachers breaking the mold of these teachings but keeping the core.  Right straight step through for every combination?  not in my school, not any more, not ever again.
Jesse


----------



## Gufbal1982 (Nov 29, 2006)

RevIV said:


> The way you are describing 3 is the way i have always done it. If the control of the attacking arm is good enough you push the arm down bringing the head down a little with it into the Modified Back fist. We also try to strike under the ear when we reach around for the take down. All i can say is i am curious to some techniques and how most of the other branches of Kempo i have seen come from different attacks. Through searching i have found many techniques were meant originally to be taught off of the right cross, the 1 -2 punch, kicks and so on. In my school we teach combination one off of a right front kick and then a right, left hook. All we did was change some of the timing the rest of the technique is identical. Also someone brought up Combo 4 - the original 4 brought over from SGM Pesare does not jump on the groin, face or shoulders. After you blast the guy in the face with the kick you wait to see where he lands, run up the side of him drop your knee on his face or collar bone and strike the neck. I was told this technique was created by Prof. Walter Godin. Has anyone else heard this? Things changed over the years for reasons only the people who changed them can know. I see the next generation of SKK teachers breaking the mold of these teachings but keeping the core. Right straight step through for every combination? not in my school, not any more, not ever again.
> Jesse


 

I agree there and I have heard that 4 was created by Prof. Walter Godin.  I know if I ever run a school again, I will not teach defenses off of a 1/2 moon forward and right punch.  Considering most attackers on the street throw overhand rights or lefts and/or haymakers, I would prefer to start them with that for practical reasons.


----------



## Danjo (Nov 29, 2006)

RevIV said:


> The way you are describing 3 is the way i have always done it. If the control of the attacking arm is good enough you push the arm down bringing the head down a little with it into the Modified Back fist. We also try to strike under the ear when we reach around for the take down. All i can say is i am curious to some techniques and how most of the other branches of Kempo i have seen come from different attacks. Through searching i have found many techniques were meant originally to be taught off of the right cross, the 1 -2 punch, kicks and so on. In my school we teach combination one off of a right front kick and then a right, left hook. All we did was change some of the timing the rest of the technique is identical. Also someone brought up Combo 4 - the original 4 brought over from SGM Pesare does not jump on the groin, face or shoulders. After you blast the guy in the face with the kick you wait to see where he lands, run up the side of him drop your knee on his face or collar bone and strike the neck. I was told this technique was created by Prof. Walter Godin. Has anyone else heard this? Things changed over the years for reasons only the people who changed them can know. I see the next generation of SKK teachers breaking the mold of these teachings but keeping the core. Right straight step through for every combination? not in my school, not any more, not ever again.
> Jesse


 
Sounds like you guys think for yourselves and are creative in your approach.


----------



## RevIV (Nov 29, 2006)

Danjo said:


> Sounds like you guys think for yourselves and are creative in your approach.


 
We try, with the blessings of our teachers.  before i read how you pulled off 3 on the cross punch i was going to write,, just wait for the left jab and do the technique lefty.
Jesse


----------



## kosho (Nov 29, 2006)

I train in shaolin kempo for many years. I now learn and teach kosho Ryu Kempo.  But my base of teaching is in shaolin kempo karate. I just now add the pricaples of kosho to all my comb, kempo's, etc to the shaolin kempo karate. 
i look for all the things in my pinions  and katas.
more than the punch, block, kick.
the throwing arts, escapeing arts, controlling arts, ETC. 
its all there just some*,  not* all Villiar teachers never learned the things inside of the forms...
I now teach the shaolin kempo karate to all my students  show them the old way it was tought.( TO ME)
and how I now teach the same thing just with some Kosho idears  and the teq now work that much better.  FOR ME
not to say it won't for others.  but what i do see is that my students are growing faster that the other shaolin kempo school in 2 towns away...
not in rank color  just in skills  and info...
mu 2 cents
steve


----------



## shaolin ninja 4 (Nov 29, 2006)

kosho said:


> I train in shaolin kempo for many years. I now learn and teach kosho Ryu Kempo. But my base of teaching is in shaolin kempo karate. I just now add the pricaples of kosho to all my comb, kempo's, etc to the shaolin kempo karate.
> i look for all the things in my pinions and katas.
> more than the punch, block, kick.
> the throwing arts, escapeing arts, controlling arts, ETC.
> ...


 

Who did you train under steve?

What didn't you like about shaolin kempo/what did you like?

Why did you leave villaris/ussd?

What was fred villari like?  What were his master instructors like?  In and out of the dojo?


----------



## marlon (Nov 29, 2006)

Danjo said:


> The only way I've been able to make it work properly off of a right-cross is to use the left hand to check the attacker's punch and hold onto it while executing the groin/bladder punch and then yanking the attacker by the arm into a modified right backfist over the arm into the temple. Otherwise, the attacker is in the wrong position for the follow-up moves.


 

Actually you do not need to block.  The move is a good cover off the right hook or an attack to the head then continue the technique.  If you are waiting to block and you are above brown or black belt you are limiting your kempo...my opinion of course and i am certainly no master...this is what training has taught me.  Try your techniques against someone swinging multiple un- choreographed strikes at you.  SK works beautifully

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## marlon (Nov 29, 2006)

RevIV said:


> The way you are describing 3 is the way i have always done it. If the control of the attacking arm is good enough you push the arm down bringing the head down a little with it into the Modified Back fist. We also try to strike under the ear when we reach around for the take down. All i can say is i am curious to some techniques and how most of the other branches of Kempo i have seen come from different attacks. Through searching i have found many techniques were meant originally to be taught off of the right cross, the 1 -2 punch, kicks and so on. In my school we teach combination one off of a right front kick and then a right, left hook. All we did was change some of the timing the rest of the technique is identical. Also someone brought up Combo 4 - the original 4 brought over from SGM Pesare does not jump on the groin, face or shoulders. After you blast the guy in the face with the kick you wait to see where he lands, run up the side of him drop your knee on his face or collar bone and strike the neck. I was told this technique was created by Prof. Walter Godin. Has anyone else heard this? Things changed over the years for reasons only the people who changed them can know. I see the next generation of SKK teachers breaking the mold of these teachings but keeping the core. Right straight step through for every combination? not in my school, not any more, not ever again.
> Jesse


 

Teachers like you Jesse, only will make SK better.  Thanks for keeping the spirit

Marlon


----------



## Touch Of Death (Nov 29, 2006)

KempoFlow said:


> From what I understand from my sensei is that it all starts to come together at the green belt level. Up until then, you are really just learning the movements and learning to flow. At green and above, you are then learning to put the power behind what you have already learned.
> 
> I do understand what you mean by some of the moves to be a little choreographed, but I trust sensei, and if she tells me that it will come together later I believe her. She is quite amazing to watch.


Its not so much that all the techs come toguether for you, but that you become more tuned into the moment.
Sean


----------



## Scherazade (Nov 30, 2006)

This reminds me of a class I taught on a couple of months ago (I study and teach SKK in a school not affiliated with any organization):

I told my fellow students to pick five combinations and practice them with their partner stepping in with a forward karate punch. Then I told them to take those five combinations and, with their partner, completely rip them apart. I wanted them to discover for themselves how some techniques, as taught, are far from foolproof. I wanted them to analyze every block, strike, kick, and the footwork to see what could work and what wouldn't on the street. Them I told them to modify the combinations to still preserve the principle but to make it more practical. By the end of the class, every student had a better idea what is practical for them and what wasn't.

In our school we always _learn_ a technique from the straight punch so we can see _theoretically_ how something should be done. But alternate forms of attack should be explored at advanced ranks; at least green and above. It's also important to practice techniques left and right handed (in other words do everything with the opposite hand or way than normal).

I also want to add, as this is my first post, that this is a great forum to have actual discussions with people about the martial arts. So many other forums seem to degenerate into shouting matches about which style is better or which lineage is the most correct (whatever that means). It's nice to see that civil conversations about the martial arts are possible on the internet.


----------



## John Bishop (Nov 30, 2006)

In contrast Kajukenbo was designed as a self defense system to be used against street attacks.  In the time of it's creation and for the most part today, most street criminals did not have any formal martial arts training.  The ones that were skilled were either the guys from the poor neighborhoods who boxed as kids and teens, or guys who were just plain mean and vicious.  
Besides being martial artists, the Kajukenbo founders (at least 4 of the 5) were also boxers, who knew that the majority of real fights weren't going to be won with one punch.  
They also knew they were not going to have a street fighter attack them with a step in lunge punch to the solar plexus.  When you get in a fight, someone's going to try to punch you in the face, break your nose, break your jaw, knock you out. 
With this in mind they designed the Kajukenbo punching defenses (Punch Counters) and break holds (Grab Arts) to be done against a variety of punching attacks that are targeted to the face.  Punch Counters are done against a right cross, left jab/right cross combination, right cross/left hook combination, etc, etc.  
Many of the Grab Arts are done against someone who grabs your shirt and hook punches, grabs your shoulder from behind and turns you for a right cross to the face, etc, etc. 
Somewhere down the line from Gascon, Pesare, Cerio, and Villari, things changed.  Sometimes change is good, and sometimes it's good to re-examine what was changed.


----------



## kosho (Nov 30, 2006)

Hopfully this will anser  your ???

*Who did you train under steve?*

I trained under master James Wright. He was a really nice person  and finally went on his own  and opened up some schools out of state.

*What didn't you like about shaolin kempo/what did you like?*
At that time I loved it all. Forms I would say where the best for me to do. I went in on days off and let the upper ranks use me as a uke. 

*Why did you leave villaris/ussd?*
It was a villaris school. It finally closed. this was in the early 80's when it opened . before Mr. Villari upset his upper teachers. all where still with him.
I worked on my own  after it closed. and then some time went by and a person named jean arseanualt came to town  and he opened a local dojo a few towns away from me  and it was shaolin kempo, but with a twist. he also tought BJJ.  so I started training with him for some years until I tracked down Shihan Tom Ingargiola out of NY and Master John Evans out of NH. and I would do video training with Shihan I  and physical training with master Evans. master Evans took me to a seminar with Hanshi Juchnik and thats when I started to add Kosho to my shaolin kempo. and I still take and teach BJJ. I like the mix of the 3 systems. 
I also have gone to seminares with prof kimo. and a large list of others. 



*What was fred villari like? What were his master instructors like? In and out of the dojo?*
I trained only a few times with Some of the other master all seemed nice. There was a couple Names I will not go into  that where a** ****
but I think you would get that from any system or what not.
If the school never closed I would still be in it proberly working for fred v some where. But i liked how it all played out for me.
I now am working on my 4th degree in SKK under Tom I and Master Evans.
and My Kosho info Comes under master Evans  and Hanshi Juchnik. when he is out on the east coast. witch is a lot. I also travel to seminars all over the U.S.A. in Kosho. I have Pat kelly flying in from Calf: in march he will be doing a 10 hr work shop seminar on kosho. he has been with hanshi
juchnik for about 30 years. 

Hope this ans. some of what you where looking for.
best to you steve


----------



## Danjo (Nov 30, 2006)

RevIV said:


> The way you are describing 3 is the way i have always done it. If the control of the attacking arm is good enough you push the arm down bringing the head down a little with it into the Modified Back fist. We also try to strike under the ear when we reach around for the take down. All i can say is i am curious to some techniques and how most of the other branches of Kempo i have seen come from different attacks. Through searching i have found many techniques were meant originally to be taught off of the right cross, the 1 -2 punch, kicks and so on. In my school we teach combination one off of a right front kick and then a right, left hook. All we did was change some of the timing the rest of the technique is identical. Also someone brought up Combo 4 - the original 4 brought over from SGM Pesare does not jump on the groin, face or shoulders. After you blast the guy in the face with the kick you wait to see where he lands, run up the side of him drop your knee on his face or collar bone and strike the neck. I was told this technique was created by Prof. Walter Godin. Has anyone else heard this? Things changed over the years for reasons only the people who changed them can know. I see the next generation of SKK teachers breaking the mold of these teachings but keeping the core. Right straight step through for every combination? not in my school, not any more, not ever again.
> Jesse


 
Here's an interesting side note: The number 3 combination has had a lot of changes to it over the years. This is from someone that trained with Persare, Cerio and Villari:

*There was no soft inward block in SK's original #3, that was improvised probaly because of inexpereinced ukes 'following' you with the punch. Now, it seems to have been adopted as standard.*

*Here's the orignal #3 as taught to George Pesare by Sonny Gascon. You're fighting two people. One in front and one behind. The one behind grabs you arms pinned (bear hug from behind), the one in front punches to your head. You duck and immediately punch, front two knuckle to groin and you're in a kneeling stance, right knee kneeling but not touching the floor. The drop down called 'duck & punch' releases the bear hug and the left elbow shoots to elbow position as a strike to the rear as you simultaneously punch the groin.. You then straighten back up with a cup & saucer (left fist over right fist) which is a full power elbow to the rear. Next, from that position you throw a right boxing uppercut to your opponent's jaw who was bent over from the blow to the groin, cross and cover, checking both downed opponents. *


----------



## Touch Of Death (Nov 30, 2006)

John Bishop said:


> In contrast Kajukenbo was designed as a self defense system to be used against street attacks. In the time of it's creation and for the most part today, most street criminals did not have any formal martial arts training. The ones that were skilled were either the guys from the poor neighborhoods who boxed as kids and teens, or guys who were just plain mean and vicious.
> Besides being martial artists, the Kajukenbo founders (at least 4 of the 5) were also boxers, who knew that the majority of real fights weren't going to be won with one punch.
> They also knew they were not going to have a street fighter attack them with a step in lunge punch to the solar plexus. When you get in a fight, someone's going to try to punch you in the face, break your nose, break your jaw, knock you out.
> With this in mind they designed the Kajukenbo punching defenses (Punch Counters) and break holds (Grab Arts) to be done against a variety of punching attacks that are targeted to the face. Punch Counters are done against a right cross, left jab/right cross combination, right cross/left hook combination, etc, etc.
> ...


Not all kenpo schools teach the art against static attacks either.
Sean


----------



## John Bishop (Nov 30, 2006)

Touch Of Death said:


> Not all kenpo schools teach the art against static attacks either.
> Sean




That's good to hear.  Sometimes when people are in a franchise situation there's a lot of pressure to stick to the "gamebook", without diviation.  I know a lot of kempo/kenpo people who have broken away from the pack have been getting into more live and realistic type training.


----------



## shaolin ninja 4 (Nov 30, 2006)

kosho said:


> Hopfully this will anser  your ???
> 
> *Who did you train under steve?*
> 
> ...



Cool thanks a lot!
Did you ever meet GM Fred Villari?

I came from ussd so the few people from ussd that did know the real history about Villaris/Ussd said bad things about him but I don't believe everything they told me cause none of them were there.


----------



## AmericanKenpoChris (Nov 30, 2006)

Does this actually work for self defense?

Would this type of training allow me to confidently, defend against an intimidating, larger, criminal that wants to hurt me when I am paralized with fear?

Here is a video of the advanced class training to protect against against aggressive violence.






http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMZCDn9lnTI&mode=related&search=


----------



## Flying Crane (Nov 30, 2006)

AmericanKenpoChris said:


> Does this actually work for self defense?
> 
> Would this type of training allow me to confidently, defend against an intimidating, larger, criminal that wants to hurt me when I am paralized with fear?
> 
> ...


 

It's interesting how that second video looks exactly like one of the basic Shotokan kata, but with different hand techniques instead of punches.


----------



## John Bishop (Nov 30, 2006)

AmericanKenpoChris said:


> Does this actually work for self defense?
> 
> Would this type of training allow me to confidently, defend against an intimidating, larger, criminal that wants to hurt me when I am paralized with fear?
> 
> ...




You know if that is what they do for the bulk of their training, then I'd suggest another school.  But doing forms _in moderation_ is a good training tool, that is used by most martial art systems. 
Looking at the second video it appears that someone has taken the common Japanese Heien 1 or the Okinawan Pinan 2, and  just changed the punches to tiger claw strikes.  I hope this wasn't a feeble attempt to say they have "kung fu" in their system.


----------



## Gufbal1982 (Dec 8, 2006)

John Bishop said:


> You know if that is what they do for the bulk of their training, then I'd suggest another school. But doing forms _in moderation_ is a good training tool, that is used by most martial art systems.
> Looking at the second video it appears that someone has taken the common Japanese Heien 1 or the Okinawan Pinan 2, and just changed the punches to tiger claw strikes. I hope this wasn't a feeble attempt to say they have "kung fu" in their system.


 
Sigh.  It probably was.


----------

