# EPAK and SL-4



## Hand Sword

Just starting this thread for information purposes (or just to be a peace maker) , so, I would like all to participate in that manner. For a while in these forums there has been quite a bit of hostility between the EPAK practitioners and SL-4 practitioners. Both sides have tried to separate themselves, as well as, re-group themselves. It was always my contention that both versions of Kenpo mentioned came from the same person. Material, such as techniques, terminology, etc.. are the same, maybe a little different focus points on the execution, but, still, fundamentally the same. It has been pointed out that the differences are extreme, and a sentiment that all the other's do this or don't do that etc.. Would the participants of both sides please, honestly explain the differences between the two as they see or believe it? What are the real feelings you have or think about the other side, or counter feelings to their theories? (Please keep it a civil, honest exchange)


----------



## JamesB

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Just starting this thread for information purposes (or just to be a peace maker) , so, I would like all to participate in that manner. For a while in these forums there has been quite a bit of hostility between the EPAK practitioners and SL-4 practitioners. Both sides have tried to separate themselves, as well as, re-group themselves.


 
I don't recall any form of hostility, other than a couple of Internet-trolls attempting to discredit the SL-4 methodology. Certainly there is no rift between 'EPAK' (whatever that means) and 'SL-4' - all the AK posters here (apart from the trolls) seem to be cordial and friendly towards each other at all times??


----------



## Rick Wade

2 more cents worth.  I am quickly running out of money.

I originally joined an origination years ago and they did things there way.  I let my dues laps and then started getting advice from different organizations in which you will see at least three different ways to do any given technique.  

I have never had the privilege of working with Doc or any SL-4 Kenpo guys.

Here is my take you need to find and organization that has its Kenpo tailored as close to you as possible and the tweak it to fit you correctly.  That is the way Mr. Parker wanted it the art to fit you not you fit the art.  

So these guys that say SL-4 doesn't work or it is crap well they are wrong in my opinion, because even though the AKKI doesnt work for me I can take allot of good things from it.  Even though SL-4 I haven't experienced it first hand I can take what I have seen them write on different forums and apply it to _*MY KENPO*_  yes it is mine because it works for me.  I don't like the bickering however I do like the differences.  And yes it is my Kenpo because through being a member of the IKKA, UKS and now UKF I don't move exactly like anyone else nor would I want to, that is why it is mine.

Aloha and Mahalo for letting me vent.

Rick


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka

Let me see if I can help encapsulate it. Coming from CK, then AK, then SL4 "hobbyist", I am familiar with both sides of the coin. Although, I cannot claim to be unbiased.

AK has/had many forms; Parker kept changing his art, making modifications, or sometimes just simply emphasizing different parts of the core cirriculum to reflect what he was working on. AK itself had several name changes to reflect these "upgrades" (think in terms of software releases...version 1.0, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, etc.). EPAK was the last fully endorsed version of kenpo taught by Ed Parker to the consuming public. Those who learned it have been taught it is a complete system, with all of what you need to know embedded within the book (so to speak), somewhere between the covers. If you can't find the answers, you haven't looked deeply enough.

Anyone...and I do mean ANYONE who doesn't agree with this instantaneously challenges the picture many have been "brought up" with in kenpo. It has been 16 years, and still there are heated debates about adding to or deleting from this core. Several "seniors" have broken from the core, and done thier own thing. Some have stated that they have done it based on their own insights; some state it is based on what Mr. Parker transmitted to them personally. Either one makes EPAK fundamentalists upset. Probably the MOST upsetting to traditionalists are the "that's not what Mr. Parker showed me" splinters.

Doc, in founding SL4, fits the latter. He bases the training and performance differences on things he and Mr. Parker had been working on in the time prior to his passing. Despite Mr. Chap'els close ties with Mr. Parker, and his impressive CV as an EP kenpoist during the years Mr. Parker was still with us, there are "seniors" who have a vested interest in denying that Doc/SL4 has anything new, better, or different than the core content. Doc's reputation among his former peers is that, even if he IS on to something, the demeanor with which he conducts himself makes it hard to support him.

I was a guest at the house of a kenpo senior for a BBQ at about the time I just started communicating with Doc, and considering meeting with him. Several other old-school seniors were in attendence (no, I won't name drop, but any kenpoist would know the names). One of them commented to the other, "He does have some good stuff, but how can he expect anyone to hear him when ya go around calling everyone else stupid?" (Note Doc's sig line).

SL4 stresses some main ideas as foundational to solid kenpo. By name, many are already found in kenpo. The application of the idea is what differs. An example would be the slap check and anatomical alignment. Kenpo has them; they are not used the same as they are in SL4. Despite video footage of Mr. Parker teaching the slap check and it's aligning mechanisms at one of Doc's classes, others continue to insist that Mr. Parker never taught that.

Why did I become a convert to SL4? I met Mr. Parker at a seminar, after having been an admirer and kenpoist for many years. Mr. White introduced us. At the time, I was heavy into mind-body relationships, and their effects on performance. One of the "fields" I was into was NLP, considered by some to be a pseudo-science. I was also heavy into "Super-Learning", which was mentioned by Mr. Parker in one of his books. I started a conversation with him about it, which developed into an arrangement to "model" Mr. Parker...to study him while he went through his stuff, stopping him at certain points to inquire about what mental shifts accompanied obvious physical ones. What became very clear to me was that Mr. Parker's personal kenpo was not the same as what rows of black belts at his seminars and classes were doing. Subtle, but profound, differences in key physical performance dimensions. I noted him doing things, stopped him mid-way through techniques or moves to ask him, "what did you just do...right there, and why?" "What shifted in your conceptualization of what you're doing, just before you did that?". 

Some of the stuff is already in the kenpo vocabulary...rebounding, eliptical orbits, gasseous phase movement, etc. But he also had multiple self-reminders built into his physical movements that he didn't even know he did, until I stopped him. Now, whether Chapel learned things akin to this from Mr. Parker directly, or simply saw them (they are there for the looking eye, but you do have to know what you're looking at), I can't say. I wasn't there. Neither were his detractors. What I can say is that, my first night meeting with him in person, and yakking kenpo until 3:30 AM in a parking lot, he was doing them. And he had names for them. And he re-wrote (my word) the techniques and some of the forms to include and exaggerate them as a way of "programming" (my word, again) these subtleties of performance into his students.

Now, I'll be the first to say that, when I watch other seniors, some of them do some of the same things. I personally think they picked them up peripherally, from unconsciously modeling Mr. Parker's movements. But they haven't isolated these keys, and included them as part of the specific teaching cirriculum as key core concepts. In my own opinion, that is what makes SL4 different. The specific attention paid to profound subtleties that can make a huge difference.

Example: In the gasseous phase of movement...if you "kenpo" long enough, you will HAVE TO pick up subtle alignment habits, or you'll fall over yourself trying to emulate the explosiveness of this phase, or simply lack the power required to make it "real". However, if you TARGET alignment...graduating speed slowly only as you have the correct subtleties of motion engrained to a habitual place...your expansion into explosive motion is much more solid, authoritative, and painful/intimidating/overwhelming for the opponent. Most kenpo teachers have a financial interest in the development of their students, and in continuing them up the ladder prior to this developing fully...if they even were aiming for it. For me, the cool part of SL4, and the difference that makes a difference, lies in these components having been identified from the core, and stressed in the teaching. Students MAY NOT move up the ladder until they can demonstrate a requisite level of understanding and competency. And the bar for that understanding is heady, and high.

In summary, you can not assert that another way might be better, without automatically intimating that the present way is somehow wrong or less-than. There are political attempts by some splinters to keep the peace by saying, "we just do it this way, beacuse we like grape jelly and you like strawberry". But Doc doesn't. He blatantly and publicly decries much of mainstream kenpo as being faulty and flawed, which pisses of kenpo players and alienates Doc from his own cousin fold. Few try to meet the man, or learn what he does or why; his abrasiveness and unwillingness to "make nice" makes it easy to react, rather than respond.

Hope this aids in your understanding,

Dave


----------



## Flying Crane

Dave,

I appreciate your posts.  In all honesty, I find your posts often are the most clear and understandable with regard to SL4, without a heavy reliance on technical terminology that those not initiated into SL4 (such as myself) would be unable to understand.

I am curious to know if there has been any objective measurements to determine if SL4 in action, is truly superior to other forms of kenpo?  I understand that SL4 has theories about indexing and movement and such that are designed to put the person into a superior position of stability and ability to move and act decisively.  I am not about to try and argue the validity of these theories since I don't even know what they are, but I do sometimes wonder if these theories, while they may be true and accurate in the raw form, are able to readily transfer into use in a chaotic, unpredictable and rapidly changing combat situation.

I believe that some individuals are truly gifted. They are able to do things with ease that others cannot, and they are able to wrap their minds around a concept or a problem in ways that others cannot do.  These people are rare.  Perhaps Mr. Parker was one of them, perhaps Mr. Chapel is one of them.  I never had the opportunity to meet either, so I don't know.  But sometimes these rare individuals, with their talents and knowledge, are able to perform in a way that few others will be able to, even with the same knowledge, because most people lack the ability to apply the knowledge and will never gain that ability no matter how they train because it is simply beyond them.  But that doesn't mean that these other people can't be talented and effective martial artists in their own right, simply thru a different approach.

So getting back to my question about testing and comparing the arts.  I don't know how this could really be done without having senior individuals from each branch of the tree get together and give each other a whomping.  I doubt that will ever happen, especially to simply decide whose method is the best.  But I'm not sure how a valid comparison could be done otherwise, so I am just pondering.

I am reminded of a story that another member of MartialTalk (non-kenpoist) shared in the forums a few months ago.  This Member had been in a tournament many years ago when he was training in a Japanese or Okinawan karate system.  At this tournament, he fought a kenpo guy and beat him in the match.  Ater the match, the kenpo guy tried to explain to this member that the roundhouse kick he  (MT Member) had used failed to follow certain basic principles and rules that, according to Ed Parker and Ed Parker's kenpo, were essential in throwing an effective roundhouse kick.  Therefor, the roundhouse kick that this Member had used in the match was inferior and this Member was therefor an inferior martial artist, was the gist of the argument.  But the problem is, this Member had scored TWICE with his roundhouse kick against this kenpoist, and that is in part why he won the match.  Now it is entirely possible that the kenpoist's comments were accurate with regard to the theories governing the roundhouse kick.  Bbut this is completely irrelevant because when push comes to shove, the MT Member could use it effectively and the kenpoist was unable to defend against it.

I sometimes think about this when I read about SL4 in the threads.  I imagine the theories are solid, but when the rubber hits the pavement, when it comes to real use, do these theories really transfer into something useable and superior, especially in comparison to other kenpo branches, or even other martial arts?  Or are they theories and notions that, while they are true in and of themselves, are unuseable except by those who are truly gifted?

any thoughts on this would be appreciated.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka

I knew a guy named Clayton...scary smart...first time he saw a Rubiks cube, he asked what it was for. Someone told him (as they handed it to him) that the object was to get all the colors to be the same on each side. In the minute or so it took for the person to tell Clayton what the cube was for and how to work it, he was done. Cube solved. Clayton hands it back and says, "that was fun. Thanks." Despite owning several rubiks cubes, and being able to solve shapes and patterns, I have still never truly solved one in my life. I literally would just tear the thing to pieces, and re-assemble it to the "solved" condition for a dashboard ornament or whatever. Clayton, on the other hand, is just wired that way.

Clayton was a teacher of some rather complex material to rather simple minded folk. That was his job. He could take very complex engineering principles, and distill them down to applicable ideas by road-workers laying asphalt. 

I refer to Doc among my old friends who also met Clayton as the "kenpo Clayton". Instantly, knowing Clayton, they get it. 

Aside from a senior-senior whomping, I and some of my old kenpo crew have experimentd with some of Doc's principles in action, and found them to be quite sound under fire. Kenpo has, in my own experience, beaten the whole technical thing to death. Kembudo-Kai Kempo was a product of a small workgroup of black belts from lotsa systems, but with a kenpo-heavy representation. Also had lotsa barbarians in the workgroup: power-lifting champs, 265 lb body-builders, bouncers, cops, military combatants...our ultimate product was to clean up the combative potential in kenpo through massive deletion and re-writing. Long techniques were reduced to the first 2-4 moves, followed by takedowns and mauling. "Berserker kenpo". A kind of kenpo Conan the Barbarian would be proud to know. A kenpo-based eclectic approach to include muay thai, judo, jujutsu (BR & JA), JKD, boxing, etc. "Made by black belts, for black belts." I tried to insert my observations of performance keys from Mr. Parker wherever I could, to keep some element of distinction. But largely, it was an early amalgamation of the MMA approach, keeping the front half of selected kenpo techs, and losing the back half, replacing them with controls, holds, pounding combo's, etc.

It was a tough crowd to please, impress, work with, etc. Still are (the guys I stay in touch with). Some are...less than entirely honorable in how they interface with the world around them in the use of self-restraint. Early on, I introduced a couple of these guys to some fundamental SL4 tools, which they -- true to their nature -- tested on some poor saps. To a man jack, they have all come back stoked, looking for more. After injuring my own shoulder working just the SL4 inward block away from Chapel's supervision (I attacked, and a white belt defended), I stopped sharing the stuff. One, because it ain't mine to share (though I have to admit...I spoon fed these guys, because I wanted to see if it would work, and I knew they would place themselves in harms way just to test out something new); two, because I know they'll misuse it, and I DO believe an instructor has a responsibility to screen data from potential hazards. Some of these gentlemen are potential hazards.

To be more clear...these are guys who were already kenpo blacks, switched gears for more grab-and-beat/ground-and-pound based training, have gone looking for trouble with both, and decided to stick with the Kembudo-Kai simplifications/adaptations. Introduced to SL4, they are stoked...""I can't tell if this is simplistic brilliance or brilliant simplicity"...and looking to either dump KBK for SL4 (if they could overcome the inertia about the commute & if Doc would even take them as students), or continue to bug me to spend time with them whenever I make it back down south to download more SL4 to them. So, Yah...it works. And you won't see them killing you with words over how it SHOULD have gone. Some of the key core concepts repeat themselves through the SL4 system, making -- in a way -- the same response to multiple types of attacks.

So, until we get a bunch of kenpo seniors into a ring for pay-per-view, I'm going with my own convincers (the few times I've applied it in the field), and the experiences of my fellow ilk from the Kai.

Best Regards,

Dave

PS -- I loved your story about the kick at the tourney...that perfectly illustrates WHY we did what we did, back when we did it (the KBK modifications). To much mental overkill, not enough "shut up and hit the guy". What SL4 does for me is to give me the HOW to hit the guy...what to do with your body AND his for max effect with minimum liability. Principles help explain some of the math behind Clayton solving the cube, and allow for transmission of ideas around HOW TO solve it. Ultimately, though, an SL4 class is filled with about 60+ low grade collisions per person, each night...learning how to mess up a guys alignment and take him out of play by messing up your classmates alignment and taking him out of play. The bummer is, someone has to be the uke. But that's often where you learn the most...flesh meeting flesh, instead of upteenth perusals and recitations of the Infinite Insights series.


----------



## Flying Crane

Thanks for the response, Dave.  I appreciate you relaying your experiences with this.  very informative, and I can appreciate the conditions under which things were getting tested.  Sounds like some solid happenings were going on.


----------



## Hand Sword

Thank you for the responses. Very informative.


----------



## Carol

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> the cube, and allow for transmission of ideas around HOW TO solve it. Ultimately, though, an SL4 class is filled with about 60+ low grade collisions per person, each night...learning how to mess up a guys alignment and take him out of play by messing up your classmates alignment and taking him out of play. The bummer is, someone has to be the uke. But that's often where you learn the most...flesh meeting flesh, instead of upteenth perusals and recitations of the Infinite Insights series.


 

What does this mean, Dave?  How is a classmate messed up and taken out of play?  What needs to be done to get him back into play?


----------



## Sigung86

Dave,

I have not had the benefit of hands on with Doc ... The one time I was close to getting to where he was in an out of the way state known as Nebraska, I'm afraid that fate intervened.  However, I have been a proponent and supporter of Doc and SL-4 since just about day one.  He has always been more than generous with me regarding accessibility and answering questions ... Even when I was too thick to comprehend his point without repeated smacks to the back of my fragile shell-like head.

It was interesting to me that when I began, perhaps poorly, attempting to defend Doc and SL-4 on these very forums, many years ago, the number of hate mails I received, a couple from some, until that moment, relatively credible, well ranked and respected by myself.  Seems like a very large number of Kenpo folk are afraid to "take it to the lab" to see if it works and would rather have spent time on keyboards than putting it all to the test.  Much knowledge can be gained from his "impromptu" experiments, if one but takes the time to do them and attempt to understand the outcomes.

My own background is pretty extensive in Chinese art, as well as Kenpo.  It all kind of fits together and We (the folks that I teach and work with) have pretty much gone the same way you have.  Lots of Police, military, and ex-military, with a smattering of "smarter" civilians (LOL!!!).  It's kind of interesting what one can accomplish with less, regarding the number of strikes and or kicks, when one applies the knowledge that SL-4 seems to impart, even when perceived imperfectly.

One interesting observation ... Last night I was working through some of my old Hsing-I/Ba-Gua material with a weather eye, and there is a lot of Doc material in there in subtle and quiet form.

I love the way you simplify your writings, and you make me grit my teeth, because I have difficulty doing so, even with the use of the NLP modeling.  Something silly in my make up, I guess, or I just like to see myself write ... LOL 

Thanks again, for your simplifications and illuminations.  They are a great adjunct to the good Doctor's information.   :ultracool

Saintly Uncle Dan


----------



## Hand Sword

Thank You Sigung86,

Could you elaborate a little on what was similar in your Kung Fu with sl-4, and is it in the "motion kenpo"?


----------



## Sigung86

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Thank You Sigung86,
> 
> Could you elaborate a little on what was similar in your Kung Fu with sl-4, and is it in the "motion kenpo"?


 
While I am not really anywhere near qualified to speak to SL-4, I have done my homework when and where provided by Doc either through direct inquiry or reading his and Dave's numerous posts on Martial Talk/Kenpo Talk.

I would very much like to suggest that you plow through his and Dave's posts and see what you can glean that makes sense to you.  Try out the experiments that are there and see for yourself.  If you need to go further, I would suggest that you make direct contact with the man, himself.  Doc, and I suspect Dave, are pretty cool, and relatively easy to talk to.

An interesting side note... In Dave's post, he alludes to Doc's signature as being insulting to some Kenpoka.  I've never seen it that way.  I tend to see it more as a guide post.  One that says, you can stay where you are, and howl at the moon, like a coyote, not knowing that you can never control it, or ... You can work like Hell, and make a journey to that moon.

As a final note... When you deal with the classical methods of Chuan Fa, or Kung fu, you will see Balance Alignments, physical alignments and checks that are used in many diverse ways that are not obvious if you haven't been made aware of them.  If you do as I suggested, you will begin to see things that should be obvious everywhere, but aren't.  And, no, in my opinion, they aren't in a lot of the current Kenpo, as I understand it.  If they were, there would not be any attitude toward SL-4 by those who do not do it.

I could be very wrong on all the above ... But I do think.

Dan


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka

Carol Kaur said:
			
		

> What does this mean, Dave? How is a classmate messed up and taken out of play? What needs to be done to get him back into play?


 
There are some "parlor trick" demonstrations Doc uses to illustrate how the body responds to being struck when it is in alignment, vs. out of alignment. One includes simply pressing a fingertip into a particular pressure point on the face, and noting that it's uncomfortable. This is followed by either an active mis-step on the part of the demo dummy, or a light pop by Doc to a body part that knocks you momentarily off your base. In that moment between when you've lost your composure, and have yet to regain it, pressing into that point again feels like you've been sliced by a knife. The common response (and mine too, having never seen it before) is to keep checking for blood, sure the sunnavabitch cut you with something. Stamp your feet, regain your composure, root, whatever, and press the point a 3rd time. Back to not hurting. I got such a kick out of this, I went around "opening the gates" on unsuspecting, uninformed co-workers (so they couldn't respond to any suggestive expectations), and making them think they got sliced.

In this misaligned state, stuff hurts more. A lot more. One night, to make a point, Doc is slugging Bode in the chest hard enough that the thumping sound is resonating off the walls. But Bode, having aligned himself first, withstands the discomfort. Doc takes one wrist, and tunrs it just to the point you start to see Bode's body compromise itself to follow the stress placed on structure...if you're familiar with aikido, jujustu, chin na, then you've seen it before. It's that disorganized glow that lets you know you're just at the beginning of getting the lock cinched on. Doc then pops Bode in the chest with much less force than before; it sounds different...the thunp has a different resonance. Bode also winces in pain from this lesser shot. Not pain from the joint pressure, but from the hit. In the same spot that didn't hurt like that just a moment ago.

In an aligned state, the body can quite naturally endure more. The shields are up, so to speak. Misalign it first...get it to compromise some part of the integrity of structure and function...and things that don't nornmally hurt, hurt like hell. So, the objective in SL4 is to establish and maintain ones own structural integrity throughout the conflict...and if some movement requires you to momentarily sacrifice or compromise your structure, re-alignments are interjected thoroughout the techniques. Meanwhile, you also make sure your opponent is misaligned. Bumps, bunts, nerve cavity strikes and presses, are all noted in Infinite Insights as part of the diagram flow of the sub-aspects of kenpo...but remember: Parker didn't do it like that. These are inserted throughout the techniques to ensure that the opponent remains misaligned, system-wide. The natural rreaction of the body is to realign itself. If you mis-step, you don't keep stagger-walking for the rest of the day; you correct it, so you can move with the integrity of coordination. So, SL4 self-defense techs are peppered with moves -- control manipulations, bumps, bunts, negative alignment mechanisms -- that are designed to repeatedly knock or twist the poor bugger out of alignment, and keep him that way as his body seeks to find it again.

Some of the paths back to alignment are predictable from certain positions. We can use that against him.  So training techs thematically look like: Align yourself in the opening moves, while you misalign him -> whack him someplace supersensitive while he's misaligned -> re-affirm the misalignment by adding another bunt, bump, twist, whatever -> whack him again, etc. Some of the misalignments are subtle, taking advantage of simple reflexes or responses to compromise his well-being; some are gross movements with obvious effects. Either way, the only way to get good at them is to do them...over, and over, and over. So, there you are, in class, getting bunted, tugged, pushed, pulled, then popped in nerves, arteries, veins, joint spaces...all parts that might smart a wee bit if you were aligned, but which hurt like heck when you aren't.

And Doc's classes are 3-6 hours long, depending on the day, and what's being worked on. Honestly, I have no idea how these guys show up for work the next day without moving like walking wounded. My next day always consists of Advil abuse, and the feeling like I was in a car wreck in the recent past with all the soreness still settling in.

Experiment: Have a guy stand there, and kick him in the inside of the upper thigh (not the jewels, just the muscles and femoral artery region). Now, either place a wristlock on him only far enough that you see his body start to respond to following it, or have him twist one of his own wrists so far that it doesn't feel normal. Kick him again, same spot, same amount of force. Watch what happens. Now, do it for 4 hours, misaligning each other, and whacking spots that hitherto did not hurt. The get back to me, and let me know how you feel. The wrist and thigh are not immediately anatomically related, but with the shields down, everything is more vulnerable. And misaligning a guy before you go at him lowers the shields.

SL4 vs. kenpo example: Attacking mace. Everyone drops back and hits with the inside-downward hammerfist/block. Not everyone pulls the guy out of his tree first, and places the pinning hand over the wrist, flattening out the carpal row (subtle misalignment of a distal extremity that effects the vulnerability of the entire system), targeting the hammerfist/block thing to specific points on the inside of the arm to further yank the guy out of his tree, before proceeding with the rest of the tech. Mr. Bugg posted a video of Doc doing an impromptu discussion of some points in attacking mace on another forum: in the opening 1.5 seconds, the cameraman got the the film running just in time to see the uke getting his head propelled downwards quite rapidly as a result of these subtle differences; a light bonk to the point on the biceps insertion combined with the carpal row flattening & nerve cavity/arterial compression inside the wrist. Doc can also be seen placing his hands together near his head in the kenpo meditation position prior to delivering the final bow; an index that provides a proprioceptive check to informs the body of the kenpoist, and provides some brief re-alignment before delivering an aligned blow to a misaligned opponent. In the middle, you can see him slide the radius of his forearm up and under the guys chin, tipping the skull back just slightly, making the righting reflex in the brain scramble to orient to a horizon or central location in space; can't do two things at once...body has to drop the shields to process this dilemma. The next move is the left-over-right index-to-backfist. Also in that vid, his left rear hand is seen being brought into that index from what seems to be a position behind him; another method of indexing...the path of travel attenuates various muscles in the body, causnig an improved coordination of parts for greater power and authority in the final delivery of the strike; again, aligned kenpoist striking a misaligned opponent. The "testable assertions" part is that you can play with these for yourself on heavy bags, trees, focus mitts, whatever. After trying these moves with the indexes inserted and adhered to, going back to the non-indexed versions feels substantially weaker & uncoordinated.

An SL4 technique line is done slowly, to make sure each of these points is addressed and adhered to. Watch a kenpo line...the techs are blazed through like a race, without forcing the opponents body to react to subtleties within the technique. Indexing, misaligning, destructive sequencing, control manipulation and strike manipulation, etc., all introduced in a white belt technique. No moving on until you get it. Not getting it? Mr. Chapel will assign one of his upper belts to work with the newbie until they do. For hours. As a matter of course.

Getting back into play? We are constantly realigning ourselves via indexes. At the end of the tech, if you're the guy feeding, peeling yourself up off the floor feels quite laborious. Once you do a couple of self-aligning movements, you're back to feeling like your old self again. At least until the soreness settles in the next day.

Regards,

Dave


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka

Sorry. Alternating Maces is the AK one I think I'm thinking (mentioned immediately in post above). I'd like to blame it on lack of sleep and a caffiene deficiency, but the reality is I have always sucked about keeping names straight...both of people, and techs. Even now, I ain't sure I got it right, and completely lack any motivation to look it up. Posterity and perfectionism will just have to deal.

D.


----------



## kenposikh

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> Sorry. Alternating Maces is the AK one I think I'm thinking (mentioned immediately in post above). I'd like to blame it on lack of sleep and a caffiene deficiency, but the reality is I have always sucked about keeping names straight...both of people, and techs. Even now, I ain't sure I got it right, and completely lack any motivation to look it up. Posterity and perfectionism will just have to deal.
> 
> D.


 
Hi DAve,

Yep Alternating maces is correct.


----------



## Doc

JamesB said:
			
		

> I don't recall any form of hostility, other than a couple of Internet-trolls attempting to discredit the SL-4 methodology. Certainly there is no rift between 'EPAK' (whatever that means) and 'SL-4' - all the AK posters here (apart from the trolls) seem to be cordial and friendly towards each other at all times??


I concur James. Although what some erroneuosly call EPAK refers primarily to Ed Parker's commercial product, SL-4 Kenpo is the same art, not a different one. What is different is the level of content and it's approach to teaching that content. I was taught and promoted by Ed Parker, I promoted his son to black belt, and teach Kenpo as he instructed me. In my book, that's Ed Parker's Kenpo. There may be some differences of opinion, but in general, most of Kenpo's practitioners seem to be more curious and inquisitive than hostile about our methodology. Although there are a couple of people who spend their time behind a keyboard looking for something to diatribe about or start bogus threads, most of these are not even really kenpo students, and seem to be a tad short in the rational thought process.

I do not, nor have I ever claimed to have created a 'new' kenpo or different 'secret' art. Those are statements made by keyboard assassins, who have a much smaller profile in-person.


----------



## Hand Sword

Not a bogus thread, a serious question. It's gone on for a while here with the blanket statements. Those Kenpoists don't do this and that, or do. We are different and separate, there are serious differences between us and them. I just wanted to get to the bottom of it, without any hostilities. I always took the view that it all came from one man, therefore it was all EPAK, so no need for the fighting. I was hoping to get out of the world of blanket statements that were the gospel, and defended as such. Where ALL sides could compare notes, so to speak.

Doc, thank you for chiming in Sir.


----------



## Carol

Doc said:
			
		

> Although what some erroneuosly call EPAK refers primarily to Ed Parker's commercial product, SL-4 Kenpo is the same art, not a different one...
> 
> I do not, nor have I ever claimed to have created a 'new' kenpo or different 'secret' art. Those are statements made by keyboard assassins, who have a much smaller profile in-person.


 

OK, but there was this exchange on this thread

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=560852



			
				eyebeams said:
			
		

> You have no intention of being the "nice guy." EPAKer, please.


 


			
				Bode said:
			
		

> BTW, I am not an EPAKer as you refer to me. I do SL4 Kenpo.



According to Bode, SL-4 is different than EPAK.


----------



## Doc

Carol Kaur said:
			
		

> OK, but there was this exchange on this thread
> 
> http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=560852
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Bode, SL-4 is different than EPAK.


First there is no such thing as EPAK. Ed Parker called it Kenpo Karate, not Ed Parker's American kenpo. He made a distinction and so do I and my lineage. Second, I already said it's different,  but that doesn't mean it's not the same art. It is very well established even in the commercial system that everyone 'does things different.' I am not from that interpretation, and we are different as well. Same art different methodology, and execution.


----------



## Seig

There have been and there always will be heated discussions amongst those that are passionate about American Kenpo. It has taken me a few years to finally understand that Doc is not criticising my Kenpo, he and my instructor are good friends, what he is lashing out at are those that decided at green belt that they were really 5ths or better, opened a school in strip mall and started giving the gift Mr. Parker gave us a really bad name in some circles. While Ed Parker never called his art Ed Parker's Kenpo,  he did call it American Kenpo. My instructor refers to what we do as the Ed Parker Kenpo Karate System. I believe that where EPAK comes from is in a differentiation between Parker systems and Tracy systems. While Doc may rail about "motion" kenpo, a term I personally find issue with, I think he would be better served calling it commercial kenpo, what he is really railing about is poor instruction based on incomplete information. Honestly, what he is saying is find some good,  quality instruction.


----------



## Bode

Carol Kaur said:
			
		

> According to Bode, SL-4 is different than EPAK.



As Handsword did in a private message, all you had to do was ask what I meant instead of assuming. I, as Doc said, was making a lineage distinction. As much as I respect Ed Parker, my knowledge comes from Doc. I show Mr. Parker respect when necessary, but to me, Doc is the currrent source. Does it come from Mr. Parker originally? Yes, but Doc is closer to home. 

People usually ask, "What martial art do you do?" To which your respond, "Kenpo" and the next question is typically, "Who is your teacher." 
SL4, problem solved. 

Also, I am of the belief that if you say EPAK to someone it generates certain thoughts about what it is you practice. It feels every person ever involved in the martial arts knows something about Kenpo. "Oh yeah, I heard of that, it's a lot of hand strikes"  By saying SL4 I avoid any misconceptions. But that's just my preference.


----------



## Flying Crane

Seig said:
			
		

> ... what he is lashing out at are those that decided at green belt that they were really 5ths or better, opened a school in strip mall and started giving the gift Mr. Parker gave us a really bad name in some circles.
> 
> While Doc may rail about "motion" kenpo, a term I personally find issue with, I think he would be better served calling it commercial kenpo, what he is really railing about is poor instruction based on incomplete information.


 
First off, if I have misunderstood anything that I am about to comment on, please feel free to correct me.

Based on other comments that Doc has made in other threads, it seems that Mr. Parker actually allowed this low quality instruction to happen.  Doc's comments indicate that Mr. Parker granted rank to people who wanted it, even when they wanted it primarily to further their business/dojo, which Mr. Parker also profited from (the Business Model/Commercial System).  Doc also commented that Mr. Parker stood by and watched while some instructors granted rank that clearly wasn't merited.  He signed off on the certificate, and made no objections.  

If this is true, why did Mr. Parker do this?  He allowed the business aspect to take over, and allowed half-trained individuals teach and represent his art, and even use his name in the business of what they were teaching.  I dont understand why he would do this.  

This situation perpetuates itself, because half-trained people teach, give rank, and the next generation of instructors is only one quarter trained, and so on.  But if Mr. Parker had not allowed these people to teach in the first place, and had not given out rank, this would have been avoided.  So now people who thought they were properly trained are being told by someone that they are not, and are being told that what they are teaching is poor quality and half understood by them.  I am not surprised that some people react in a hostile manner when someone comes along and starts telling them that what they do is all half-baked.  If this is true, they were apparently mislead by Mr. Parker himself.  This just doesn't make sense to me.

I can understand why some non-SL4 people would feel resistant to Doc.  In the years since Mr. Parker's death, many people have stepped forward and made claims to be teaching the true art, the only way it was meant to be done and all others didn't get it right.  I don't have a close connection to Mr. Parker, but even I was aware of this.  It has been played out in the Martial Arts magazines, and on the internet.  All kinds of wild claims are made.  To many people, Doc might seem like another one of these.  I am not stating that I think he is (I am in no position to judge one way or the other), but I can certainly understand why people would feel this way.

I guess what I am saying is that if what Doc claims about the prevalence of poor quality kenpo is really true, it all comes back to Mr. Parker.  If so, why did Mr. Parker allow this to happen, and perhaps even encourage it?


----------



## Flying Crane

Bode said:
			
		

> As Handsword did in a private message, all you had to do was ask what I meant instead of assuming.


 
Well, I could see where she might have thought she understood what you meant, and no further clarification was necessary.  Evidently she was wrong, but didn't realize it.  It happens on the internet.  Messages get jumbled and misinterpreted.


----------



## Bode

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Well, I could see where she might have thought she understood what you meant, and no further clarification was necessary.  Evidently she was wrong, but didn't realize it.  It happens on the internet.  Messages get jumbled and misinterpreted.


Yep, it was too late to edit my response. I looked back at it and went, "Hmmm, that could be taken differently". My apologies. I just never realize how much what people read is actually remembered! However my quote came off, it wasn't good. (I wish I had as much time as Dr. Crouch to write a response)

In regards to Mr. Parker allowing the business model to run wild. I can only imagine that at the time, like Doc now, he did his best to educate the close students he did have. Will there be a better way to communicate the ideas, concepts, and movement later? Yes. But at the time Mr. Parker was probably doing his best to teach what took him years and years to learn. He had not yet codified the material into something that was methodically "teachable". I have seen videos of Mr. Parker trying to teach someone how to "Slap Check", only to have the student not even see what Mr. Parker was doing. It's not that he didn't try, it's just that his time and ability to articulate the concept were limited. The codification process for how to teach slap checks did not exist. Rather than introduce the material early he simply removed or let people who picked it up, pick it up. 

Naturally with some students he either had more time with or they came from similar origins (As did Doc. He was a student of Ark Wong). Because they had the same background and fundamentals it made it much easier to teach the material. They both spoke the same language so to speak. 

Did Mr. Parker let promote bad black belts? That isn't for me to decide. He let each person tailor the art to fit their backgrounds. This allowed for people to pick up the art quick. Did it help his bottom line? Yes. Did it make the people worse martial artists? Probably not. 

The theme I am harping on is this... you have to put the material in context of the times. Back then the martial arts world was much different. Very few people had been exposed to Karate. Mr. Parker brought it to the masses. So the question is, "Are people better off having no knowledge of martial arts or some decent knowledge?" Was Mr. Parkers teaching "low quality" because he tried to disseminate information broadly? My oppinion is no.


----------



## Flying Crane

Bode said:
			
		

> But at the time Mr. Parker was probably doing his best to teach what took him years and years to learn. He had not yet codified the material into something that was methodically "teachable".


 
Good point, and I was going to go into this a bit but forgot.  Doc keeps talking about how things changed over and over, the system evolved as Mr. Parker tweaked things to fit a probably constantly changing vision of what the art should be.  What an early student learned would be quite different from what a later student learned.  I don't think this means that the early student learned "bad" stuff, or was a poor student or half-trained, even tho Mr. Parker later saw reasons to make changes.  Perhaps the art in its later stages broke thru to a new level that it hadn't achieved before.  But it doesn't mean that what came before was no good.  In fact, the later breakthru would not have been possible without the earlier version.


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> Good point, and I was going to go into this a bit but forgot. Doc keeps talking about how things changed over and over, the system evolved as Mr. Parker tweaked things to fit a probably constantly changing vision of what the art should be. What an early student learned would be quite different from what a later student learned. I don't think this means that the early student learned "bad" stuff, or was a poor student or half-trained, even tho Mr. Parker later saw reasons to make changes. Perhaps the art in its later stages broke thru to a new level that it hadn't achieved before. But it doesn't mean that what came before was no good. In fact, the later breakthru would not have been possible without the earlier version.


 
If you get out to enough seminars or garage-sessions with enough seniors from various decades in kenpo, you see some significant differences in focus. Guys from the 60's and 70's who broke off to do their own thing don't concern themselves with things like extensions, forms, family groupings, etc. You'll see Obscure Wing show up in the white belt cirriculum of one splinter, and in the orange or purple of another guys. The focus is usually on training harder to hit harder. I think it was Mr. LaBounty who made the distinction between iron-workers & watch-makers. The kenpoists from more recent generations tend to have a more watch-maker mentality, focusing on definitions and specifics; older guys on iron-working...get grizzled and hard by banging away. The older stuff tends to look a bit less sophisticated, but IMO works a bit better for you when it comes time to actually blast the bad guy in the grill.

I thought the story about the kenpoist who lost the match lecturing the guy who won it on kick mechanics was a priceless demonstration of this issue. The old iron-workers wouldn't have bothered talking about it at all; they would have just gone home, and trained the heck out of counters to that kick, and jumped into the very next tourney to see if it worked, imagining that guy they lost to the enitre time they trained (seeing his face on the heavy bag, etc.).

And, btw, Doc ain't the only guy I've heard discuss how rank was ratified or given away for poor performance. Another gentleman who was intimately associated with Mr. Parker, and used to join him on grading boards abroad, recounted being aghast at how bad some of the people testing (and passing) were...he would whisper in the ear of his comrades, just to the side of Mr. Parkers vision. Mr. Parker eventually asked him not to do that, because it was on him to look imperious and impressed as the SGM, and it was hard to do when he knew what they were whispering in the corners, and it would make him want to laugh. He also added that Mr. Parker, occasionally seeming to have given up on the whole quality control hting in exchange for not going BK again, would rise from the grading table to leave the room and sort of "baptise" or "announce" grade advancements as he walked away. "You're a 4th now...you go ahead and be a 5th..". Apparently, when word of this tendency got out, hangers-on looking for this sort of social promotion would show up at the tests, wearing their gi's with belts on, and cluster around the table as the test wound down, hoping to be blessed by the kenpo pope to a new black belt grade. So now you have a small gaggle of people with unwarranted promotions, spreading the gospel as they know it. But hey...they got the belt and the blessing from the old man, so that has to prove something about them being right, eh?

Why would he do it? He had a family to support, and had already gone BK once. The people closer to him got more of the meat and potato's, so the legacy wouldn't die. I may not like the commercialism of the art(s), but the more I struggle financially, the more I can see allowing the temptation to take little Jonny's money in exchange for another stripe on his pee-wee belt. 

When I had a studio in Stanton, I had differing levels of expectation for different folks. I had the kids class, and the adults classes. Then, when everybody went home, we shut the door for my long-time workout buddies and serious students to come by. Noses would break; ribs would crack; knees would bend in ways they shouldn't outta. If I get hit by a car tomorrow, both groups have certificates signed by me. But at least I know the core intensity I wanted to see my art represented with lives on in a few students. I was (in my opinion) clever about it though: different looking certs with different names for the art.

D.


----------



## Flying Crane

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> I think it was Mr. LaBounty who made the distinction between iron-workers & watch-makers. The kenpoists from more recent generations tend to have a more watch-maker mentality, focusing on definitions and specifics; older guys on iron-working...get grizzled and hard by banging away. The older stuff tends to look a bit less sophisticated, but IMO works a bit better for you when it comes time to actually blast the bad guy in the grill.


 
Interesting analogy.  

I haven't actually had much experience with EPAK people, and in all honesty most of my understanding of how they do things comes from what I have read in magazines, books, and the internet.  The one thing that I have noticed is this trend toward definitions, classifications, terminology, and science to try to probe and understand the art.  This seems to me to be an intellectual exercise that, like I have stated before, may be true in the theoretical level, but I often question how much of it translates well onto the street and makes any difference.  I really thought that this approach is just downright weird and even misguided.  It seemed to me that they were trying to write the physics equation to describe the perfect punch, or something.  Hell, put your pen down and just get out there and throw some punches.  Forget the physics and other overly intellectual minutia.

When I first found Martial Talk, and first started reading about things like SL4, I have to be honest, I figured it is just another bunch of guys looking for that elusive physics equation.  But your posts, Dave, have been helpful.  Your descriptions about what you guys are trying to accomplish, and how you go about training, are written in an understandable way for those of us not in the know.  Thanks again for your patience in the stuff you have written, it has not gone unnoticed nor unappreciated.

Getting back to the Ironworkers vs. Watchmakers analogy.  Maybe SL4 are the guys who build and maintain huge clockworks like Big Ben.  You guys look for the most effective nuances, you get into the minutia, but you still hammer away with the big machinery and do the heavy lifting.

thanks.


----------



## Bode

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> I
> Getting back to the Ironworkers vs. Watchmakers analogy.  Maybe SL4 are the guys who build and maintain huge clockworks like Big Ben.  You guys look for the most effective nuances, you get into the minutia, but you still hammer away with the big machinery and do the heavy lifting.
> thanks.



I understand why you would say this given the track record on the forums. However, one of the things I constantly hear from Doc is, "Stop trying to be so damn technical and just move!" He is always making sure we don't try to be the scholar before the warrior. We will have time to be the scholar when we can't move anymore! 

I also believe that online it is much easier to talk about mechanics and the "how to" because the physical element is missing on the forum. So we often laps into technical jargon, scientific terms, etc, because that is how we describe them VOID of the physical element. In class, it's all physical. I just clocked someone last night who simply didn't get out of the way fast enough. We could discuss simple ways to beat someone to a pulp ad nauseum, but discussing the truly HOW to improve a technique is what the online forums is best suited for (along with training methods). We struggle online to put our best foot forward and describe the material in a way, using terminology, that best communicates an idea. I.e. the terminology should be descriptive. 

Again, and I emphasize, this is simply because of the absence of the physical element.
So yes, we are technical, but until someone steps on our mats, it's really hard to tell whether or not we truly can be physical. Dr. Dave will attest to our classess having a strong physical element.


----------



## Flying Crane

Bode said:
			
		

> I understand why you would say this given the track record on the forums. However, one of the things I constantly hear from Doc is, "Stop trying to be so damn technical and just move!" He is always making sure we don't try to be the scholar before the warrior. We will have time to be the scholar when we can't move anymore!
> 
> I also believe that online it is much easier to talk about mechanics and the "how to" because the physical element is missing on the forum. So we often laps into technical jargon, scientific terms, etc, because that is how we describe them VOID of the physical element. In class, it's all physical. I just clocked someone last night who simply didn't get out of the way fast enough. We could discuss simple ways to beat someone to a pulp ad nauseum, but discussing the truly HOW to improve a technique is what the online forums is best suited for (along with training methods). We struggle online to put our best foot forward and describe the material in a way, using terminology, that best communicates an idea. I.e. the terminology should be descriptive.
> 
> Again, and I emphasize, this is simply because of the absence of the physical element.
> So yes, we are technical, but until someone steps on our mats, it's really hard to tell whether or not we truly can be physical. Dr. Dave will attest to our classess having a strong physical element.


 
Thanks for that clarification.  You are absolutely right.  We cant whomp on each other here in the forums to get the point across.  All we can do is talk and talk and talk some more and that isn't the same as doing.


----------



## Flying Crane

Another question for the SL4 people: 

Before I stumbled onto Martial Talk, I had been completely unaware of Mr. Parker's training with Ark Wong, and the heavy influence that training apparently had on Mr. Parker's further development of kenpo.

My kenpo is from the Tracy lineage.  I have read descriptions of some of the EPAK (sorry, I know you guys don't feel that's an appropriate term, but it's convenient shorthand when I am typing) techniques and many of them seem to still be quite close and similar to what we do in Tracys, inspite of the differences in names.  So it seems to me that the root of the techniques remained kenpo, even tho they apparently went thru some pretty extensive changes from the early days.  So in what ways did Mr. Wong's teaching influence Mr. Parker's kenpo?  Did Mr. Parker keep any of the material that he learned from Mr. Wong, and bring it directly into kenpo?  Was it more in the approach to How to do something, rather than simply What to do?  What would you say is the signature mark that Mr. Wong left on the kenpo that Mr. Parker developed after training with him?  Why did Mr. Parker not keep any of the forms that he learned from Mr. Wong?  

Thanks.


----------



## JamesB

I first became aware of SL4 several years ago, after reading articles posted on the Internet. You know, the whole 'SL-4 vs Motion Kenpo' thing, and how commercial-kenpo's blocks were not 'correct', and that the stances were no good etc. I was a brown-belt at the time IIRC. I was indignant - "My kenpo's not commercial!" - only realising years later that it was, and had to be, otherwise our small school would not have existed. Back then I was not aware that my own instructor was a student of Dr Chapel's.

When I started reading Doc's posts I remember thinking 'hmmm this sounds interesting, what's all this about Advanced Kenpo Concepts and SL-4??' But at the same time I was also thinking, who on earth is this guy? (Doc). There I was reading articles about Kenpo, and wanting to believe that AK was this fantastic art, but at the same time feeling very threatened by what Doc was saying in his articles. I "knew" that the neutral-bow was the "best" stance, and that the inward-block was the "best" way to block and I didn't know how to react to Doc's posts - at the time they felt like an attack on my own kenpo.

When AK people join the Internet to read about Kenpo I think the majority instinctively seek out what they believe in - i.e. they want to validate their own kenpo and feel happy about what they are doing. It's natural human behaviour to act this way. However for some people, any post that flys in the face of what they do is perceived as an attack on their own kenpo and many aren't comfortable dealing with it - so they don't, at least in any constructive way.

There is a idealogy held up by pretty much all kenpo schools, that AK is the best and baddest martial-art out there. New students are indoctrinated with this mantra, and rationalize their training by saying 'this is Ed Parker's kenpo, obviously it's the best'. They believe that simply following the list of techniques written out in "Infinite Insights" will lead them to the same place that Ed Parker was at. What many fail to realise is that what they are learning/practising is *not* Ed Parker's kenpo. It is their instructor's.

Think logically for a moment on how Mr Parker got to where he was at, and why you won't be ending up at that same place. He studied Judo, Karate, Kung-fu, all manner of arts. He didn't just train in them though, he studied the science behind them. All day, every day, because he was *that driven* to develop himself. Do you really believe that your current Kenpo syllabus will get you moving like Ed Parker? All those subtle nauances, that explosive energy? Sure, you might pick some of these things up along they way, but is it really the most effective way to learn how to develop those kind of body-mechanics? 

Kenpo is supposed to be the 'most effective' martial-art. So what happens when someone comes along and shows you that what you are doing is not effective anymore? Do you put your fingers in your ears and go 'na na na I can't hear you!", or do you stand up tall, swallow your ego, and try  to incorporate these new ideas into your kenpo. Not just for your own benefit, but for your student's as well? That is what Kenpo is all about. It's clearly one of the driving principles in the Infinite Insights - that holiest of bibles that must not be contraticted. Have an open mind, be honest about yourself, and when you find something different don't just discount it because it's not 'kenpo' as you know it - instead play with it, and if it works for you then embrace it as best you can.

All those weird things that Doc talks about, such as BAMs and PAMs, and body alignment, and god-knows what else. They are wonderful devices, built into every technique, that teach you how to correct your posture and achieve a better standard of Kenpo. I won't ever move like Ed Parker, or Doc, or my own instructor. I'm not an SL-4 student, but just the principles (such as PAMing and BAMing and alignment) have really done alot to improve my kenpo and I totally dig the SL-4 approach. 

I used to think that SL-4 was a different art. Then I realised that I didn't understand my own art. SL-4 *is* American Kenpo. It is the same art, it just has a very different approach to training. You want to know why Doc is so vocal? I believe he loves his art so much he just wants to share what he does so that everyone can improve their own art as well. Doc's not the only one, I'm sure there are lots of really good kenpoists from that same era as well, but Doc seems to have gone further by 'codifying' his material into a really solid syllabus, so that mere mortals like myself actually have a chance of taking some of it on board.


----------



## Flying Crane

JamesB said:
			
		

> Think logically for a moment on how Mr Parker got to where he was at, and why you won't be ending up at that same place. He studied Judo, Karate, Kung-fu, all manner of arts. He didn't just train in them though, he studied the science behind them. All day, every day, because he was *that driven* to develop himself. Do you really believe that your current Kenpo syllabus will get you moving like Ed Parker? All those subtle nauances, that explosive energy? Sure, you might pick some of these things up along they way, but is it really the most effective way to learn how to develop those kind of body-mechanics?


 
This is a very good point, and something that I think many people don't realize.  

It is always an interesting thing when someone founds a "new" system (not just referring to Mr. Parker, but to any in the general sense).  Often, it seems that the founder is very skilled, the first generation students are also quite skilled, but after that there is a general degredation in the ability of the students who follow.

Often, I think that when someone establishes a new system, they do so after having studied deeply several different arts.  They then distill what they feel are the best aspects of those arts into one new system.  This seems to work well for the founder and perhaps his direct students, but not so well after that.  In my opinion, the reason for this is that the many years of training in the different arts gave the founder a much deeper understanding, and greater skill.  Having trained the different systems in their entirety, is what gave him the skill.  Now, having dissected and rearranged the different arts into something new, the complete picture has been chopped up and any students who do not also study the different arts in a complete manner will never achieve the same level of ability.  The students don't get the benefit of all the basics that make the different arts work in their specific manner.  They also don't have the same long years put into study and training, so they just don't reach the same level that the founder did.  Instead, they get a hodge-podge of stuff, none of which works as well in a disjointed manner, when taken out of the context of the parent art.

I sometimes wonder if Kenpo suffers from this problem in some way.  Mr. Parker was very talented, and had studied several arts under several teachers.  His kenpo is derived from these several arts, but does not include any of the arts in their entirety.  Maybe that is one of the problems that later generations have difficulty in overcoming.


----------



## Carol

Flying Crane said:
			
		

> I sometimes wonder if Kenpo suffers from this problem in some way. Mr. Parker was very talented, and had studied several arts under several teachers. His kenpo is derived from these several arts, but does not include any of the arts in their entirety. Maybe that is one of the problems that later generations have difficulty in overcoming.


 
That is an interesting.  Most (but not all) of my instructors (and assistant instructors) have black belts in Kenpo as well as at least one other art.  The ones that do the best job at describing the art the way I can best understand/remember/process it are the ones that have the most diverse backgrounds.


----------



## JamesB

Carol Kaur said:
			
		

> That is an interesting. Most (but not all) of my instructors (and assistant instructors) have black belts in Kenpo as well as at least one other art. The ones that do the best job at describing the art the way I can best understand/remember/process it are the ones that have the most diverse backgrounds.


 
A diverse background is good in many ways, but is also the reason why there is so much variation in Kenpo - not everyone's stances are the same, blocks are different everywhere you go, and all because some instructors were kungfu guys, some were karate etc.


----------



## Carol

JamesB said:
			
		

> A diverse background is good in many ways, but is also the reason why there is so much variation in Kenpo - not everyone's stances are the same, blocks are different everywhere you go, and all because some instructors were kungfu guys, some were karate etc.


 
That hasn't been my impression with my own training.  Despite the differences in instruction, whether I am engaged with an instructor in my own school or in an outside school...the stances, blocks, strikes, have all been the same....despite the very different backgrounds of the folks that have tried to teach me.  I tend to make the same mistakes, and receive the same corrections until I can properly get the improvement through my thick skull.  :rofl:     

What does seem to matter is the lineage and how the particular senior learned Kenpo and taught it to the head instructors.   I think the basics that I drill on are the same from school to school due to the commonality of lineage.   But, that's just my personal experience.


----------



## Bode

On that note...
In my oppinion the lack of significant knowledge by many of the martial arts teachers out there is the unwillingness to stay with one teacher for a long period of time. Granted, maybe they haven't found that one, amazing teacher. The teacher that never ceases to add layers of depth to what you thought you knew. I don't see anything wrong with studying other arts ad nauseum, but I caution those who do this because, perhaps, they may not have had the time to be exposed to all the layers in any particular art. 

In regards to SL4... Doc stayed as a student of Mr. Parkers for 27 years. Where many people got their black belt and left to open a school or train already existing students, Doc was ever present. There were very few students of Mr. Parker who were as consistently present and not dabbling in other arts, competition fighting, running the business, etc... 

I truly believe that Kenpo, when taught properly, is a very complete system with the exception of rolling around on the ground. (You do learn arm locks, bars, finger locks, etc... just not often applying them on the ground). But the question is, if Kenpo is complete, then why the need to get a black belt in 3,4, or 5 arts? Why all the crosstraining in other arts? 

If it is because of boredom then perhaps the student should seriously look at their teacher and ask, does he really know what he's doing?

If it is to "become a more rounded martial artist" I would suggest that there are only so many ways someone can throw a punch, shoot for a takedown, sucker kick you, etc.... all of those I found well covered in the curriculum. In short, anything standup is covered by Kenpo if you are dilligent and have a patient, knowledgeable teacher. 

So back to the thread. The difference between SL4 and EPAK... EPAK has become a generic term. Many people get a black belt in it and walk away thinking they have learned everything they needed. It's not their fault, the commerical system was designed to allow people to do this. Tailor it to fit you. 

I was just talking to a bodyguard the other day and she asked, "What martial art do you do?" I said, "SL4 Kenpo" to which I invariably get the reply, "Oh, I know what Kenpo is." People latch onto the idea that it's all the same. It's not. The foundation is, but each teacher took it the direction they chose. Tracy's stuck with the earlier Chinese Kenpo. Other people splintered off and took what they needed. (Danny Inosanto). So is it all the same? Absolutely not. SL4 has the same roots, but not the same manner and execution of technique.


----------



## Doc

Seig said:
			
		

> There have been and there always will be heated discussions amongst those that are passionate about American Kenpo. It has taken me a few years to finally understand that Doc is not criticising my Kenpo, he and my instructor are good friends, what he is lashing out at are those that decided at green belt that they were really 5ths or better, opened a school in strip mall and started giving the gift Mr. Parker gave us a really bad name in some circles. While Ed Parker never called his art Ed Parker's Kenpo,  he did call it American Kenpo. My instructor refers to what we do as the Ed Parker Kenpo Karate System. I believe that where EPAK comes from is in a differentiation between Parker systems and Tracy systems. While Doc may rail about "motion" kenpo, a term I personally find issue with, I think he would be better served calling it commercial kenpo, what he is really railing about is poor instruction based on incomplete information. Honestly, what he is saying is find some good,  quality instruction.


There are some sir who have a significant problem with the term "commercial" as well, although both descriptors are more than appropriate. (motion or commercial)  I tend to use them both for that reason. The commercial system is based on the abstract study of motion, and Parker said the same.

However, although I have pointed out on numerous occasions the flaws in the commercial system, I have always stated the level of sophistication of what is done with this system is a direct reflection on, and the responsibility of the head instructor. You sir are one of the lucky ones who happens to have a teacher that is flat out brilliant, AND chooses to use it in the art. However he is an anomoly within the system, and does not reflect the vast majority of those who populate what has become more business than martial art. In fairness there are other intelligent teachers in the arts as well, (I don't want to start naming names and forget someone) but many of them have made a concious choice to but their brilliance into marketing the product and themselves for business purposes, instead of close examination and implimentation of the art. So even these people make a choice that leaves much wanting as far as the art is concerned. But even these are a very small minority. Kenpo isn't exactly overflowing with MENSA members sir.


----------



## Carol

Bode said:
			
		

> On that note...
> In my oppinion the lack of significant knowledge by many of the martial arts teachers out there is the unwillingness to stay with one teacher for a long period of time. Granted, maybe they haven't found that one, amazing teacher. The teacher that never ceases to add layers of depth to what you thought you knew. I don't see anything wrong with studying other arts ad nauseum, but I caution those who do this because, perhaps, they may not have had the time to be exposed to all the layers in any particular art.
> 
> In regards to SL4... Doc stayed as a student of Mr. Parkers for 27 years. Where many people got their black belt and left to open a school or train already existing students, Doc was ever present. There were very few students of Mr. Parker who were as consistently present and not dabbling in other arts, competition fighting, running the business, etc...
> 
> I truly believe that Kenpo, when taught properly, is a very complete system with the exception of rolling around on the ground. (You do learn arm locks, bars, finger locks, etc... just not often applying them on the ground). But the question is, if Kenpo is complete, then why the need to get a black belt in 3,4, or 5 arts? Why all the crosstraining in other arts?
> 
> If it is because of boredom then perhaps the student should seriously look at their teacher and ask, does he really know what he's doing?
> 
> If it is to "become a more rounded martial artist" I would suggest that there are only so many ways someone can throw a punch, shoot for a takedown, sucker kick you, etc.... all of those I found well covered in the curriculum. In short, anything standup is covered by Kenpo if you are dilligent and have a patient, knowledgeable teacher.


 
Personally, I enjoy hearing people's reasons for doing what they do, or even what they like or don't like.  But...what I'm reading seems like some hurried negative judgement behind one's individual _reasons_ for training and that just sits with me in a bad way.   

Maybe I'm just reading this wrong and I do apologize if I am, but I feel like I'm being put on the defensive.  The way my instructors learned their arts are not the way that you described.  I don't think my Kenpo is something that needs massive justification, but I do respect and appreciate the folks that I train with and I'd hate to see them slighted for spomething they are not.  I hope that is understandable 




			
				Bode said:
			
		

> So back to the thread. The difference between SL4 and EPAK... EPAK has become a generic term. Many people get a black belt in it and walk away thinking they have learned everything they needed. It's not their fault, the commerical system was designed to allow people to do this. Tailor it to fit you.
> 
> I was just talking to a bodyguard the other day and she asked, "What martial art do you do?" I said, "SL4 Kenpo" to which I invariably get the reply, "Oh, I know what Kenpo is." People latch onto the idea that it's all the same. It's not. The foundation is, but each teacher took it the direction they chose. Tracy's stuck with the earlier Chinese Kenpo. Other people splintered off and took what they needed. (Danny Inosanto). So is it all the same? Absolutely not. SL4 has the same roots, but not the same manner and execution of technique.


 
That actually makes a lot of sense.  I bet if I was in class with you all, many of this would be easier to follow.  (Maybe someday... )   Trying to soak it up just from the net isn't quite as clear.  Thanks a lot for clarifying  :asian:


----------



## Seig

Once I was talking to another Instructor and we were discussing the whole pain compliance thing. I said it's fun to teach but not what I rely on. He asked me what I relied on, my answer, blunt force trauma....


----------



## Sigung86

Seig said:
			
		

> Once I was talking to another Instructor and we were discussing the whole pain compliance thing. I said it's fun to teach but not what I rely on. He asked me what I relied on, my answer, blunt force trauma....


 
My whole astronomical paradigm consists of, "Twinkle, Twinkle little star".
 

I was gonna do a rofl smilie, but for some reason I can't pull up the list of the rest of the smilies.  Just consider the little smile a big rofl smart alecky kind of response that is apropos of absolutely nothing.  In other words, no offense was intended in the making of this little funny.


----------



## D.Cobb

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> SL4 vs. kenpo example: Attacking mace. Everyone drops back and hits with the inside-downward hammerfist/block. Not everyone pulls the guy out of his tree first, and places the pinning hand over the wrist, flattening out the carpal row (subtle misalignment of a distal extremity that effects the vulnerability of the entire system), targeting the hammerfist/block thing to specific points on the inside of the arm to further yank the guy out of his tree, before proceeding with the rest of the tech. Mr. Bugg posted a video of Doc doing an impromptu discussion of some points in attacking mace on another forum: in the opening 1.5 seconds, the cameraman got the the film running just in time to see the uke getting his head propelled downwards quite rapidly as a result of these subtle differences; a light bonk to the point on the biceps insertion combined with the carpal row flattening & nerve cavity/arterial compression inside the wrist. Doc can also be seen placing his hands together near his head in the kenpo meditation position prior to delivering the final bow; an index that provides a proprioceptive check to informs the body of the kenpoist, and provides some brief re-alignment before delivering an aligned blow to a misaligned opponent. In the middle, you can see him slide the radius of his forearm up and under the guys chin, tipping the skull back just slightly, making the righting reflex in the brain scramble to orient to a horizon or central location in space; can't do two things at once...body has to drop the shields to process this dilemma. The next move is the left-over-right index-to-backfist. Also in that vid, his left rear hand is seen being brought into that index from what seems to be a position behind him; another method of indexing...the path of travel attenuates various muscles in the body, causnig an improved coordination of parts for greater power and authority in the final delivery of the strike; again, aligned kenpoist striking a misaligned opponent. The "testable assertions" part is that you can play with these for yourself on heavy bags, trees, focus mitts, whatever. After trying these moves with the indexes inserted and adhered to, going back to the non-indexed versions feels substantially weaker & uncoordinated.


 
I was wondering Sir, where would I have to click to find the aforementioned video?

--Dave:asian:


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka

D.Cobb said:
			
		

> I was wondering Sir, where would I have to click to find the aforementioned video?
> 
> --Dave:asian:


 
It's on youtube. I'll see if I can find the URL & paste it here, though I'm pretty crappy at the whole tech thing.

D.


----------



## IWishToLearn

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAa7I0r2bOg

Doc at Chinese Restaurant from YouTube.


----------



## D.Cobb

Thank you gents. What a scary individual 

--Dave


----------



## kenposikh

D.Cobb said:
			
		

> Thank you gents. What a scary individual
> 
> --Dave


 
He's alright when you get to know him


----------



## jazkiljok

Doc said:
			
		

> However, although I have pointed out on numerous occasions the flaws in the commercial system, I have always stated the level of sophistication of what is done with this system is a direct reflection on, and the responsibility of the head instructor.



i don't know if anyone else has posed this question but when you say the commercial system is dependent on the individual knowledge and ability of the head instructor-- how exactly does that differ from other arts like for example-- Shotokan Karate, Okinawan Kempo, TKD and the myriad chinese arts?  couldn't you apply the same standard of competency in what is taught to all arts?


----------



## Sigung86

jazkiljok said:
			
		

> i don't know if anyone else has posed this question but when you say the commercial system is dependent on the individual knowledge and ability of the head instructor-- how exactly does that differ from other arts like for example-- Shotokan Karate, Okinawan Kempo, TKD and the myriad chinese arts?  couldn't you apply the same standard of competency in what is taught to all arts?


Kinda taking the liberty to jump in here with observations on other systems.  When I was living in England, back in 74 - 78, there was a poll of some sort taken by a Magazine published in Taiwan, and there were over 2000 assorted styles of Kung fu extent in Taiwan and mainland China ... Up to and including the "Magnificent Battling Butterfly" ... Very clever those "Heathen Chine'e".  The Japanese, who inevitibly took their queues and most of their karat&#233; knowledge from the Okinawans, ended up with a myriad of different styles all, more or less, based on the admixture of Okinawan "T&#233;" and Chinese kung fu styles.  The interesting things to me, from my various investigations is that the volume of material evident in many of these systems was pretty small.  

The masters of many of these systems took a minimalist point of view regarding what they actually practiced, and what they taught.  For instance, Funakoshi (Shotokan's founder) practiced only 3 or 4 kata, and tons of makiwara and other striking methods.  Even Mitose, regardless of whether you believe, disbelieve, idolize, or intensely dislike, only practiced one or two kata, that were, essentially, Okinawan.  Not Japanese, Not Chinese, but Okinawan... That is, if his press corp is to be believed.

All of that, simply says, that you are right.  You get no more, nor no less out of any system that you endeavour to learn than the instructor is capable of giving you.  After that, it becomes what you make it, or don't make it... And it then becomes something else.  Much like most of the Kenpo that is out there nowadays.

I believe it is funny/strange, coming from a Tracy's background like I do, to watch what is happening, and sadly, in American Kenpo.  No one has "the secret".  Even Doctor Chap&#233;l, who is one of three people that I would want to study any form of Kenpo under, has, simply put, a path and an evolution.  His material takes what he has learned from SGM Parker, and further personal evolution and become SL-4.  It isn't for everyone.  It is, however, an extremely intelligent path or "Journey".  But the point is that for all the years that Tracy's was a commercial franchise system, It has had the same ups and downs.  

Go to Ted Sumner's school and you will find, I do believe, that his applications of Tracy Karat&#233; techniques are really different from the techniques taught in Tim Golby's schools in the Midwest.  And all are, to a greater or lesser extent different from the Tracy's schools on the East Coast, and even more afield from the JT Will Schools, which started as Tracy based schools, and went on to become an interesting mix of Tracy's and Ed Parker's Kenpo, along with stuff that some of us have never seen before.  Howver, it was all, basically, Tracy's Karat&#233;, with the instructor's personal emphasis and insights.  :idunno:

What that all gets you, if you could spend your entire life studying all the myriad systems, is all the instructors know.  No one has the entire system, OF ANYTHING, not one, each has only her/his interpretation of that system, and that ... *IS ALL YOU GET*, because, that is all *THEY GOT*.

Ahem ... We now resume our regular broadcasting. :caffeine:


----------



## D.Cobb

kenposikh said:
			
		

> He's alright when you get to know him


 
Yes, I've had that impression over the years. 

--Dave


----------



## Flying Crane

Sigung86 said:
			
		

> Kinda taking the liberty to jump in here with observations on other systems. When I was living in England, back in 74 - 78, there was a poll of some sort taken by a Magazine published in Taiwan, and there were over 2000 assorted styles of Kung fu extent in Taiwan and mainland China ... Up to and including the "Magnificent Battling Butterfly" ... Very clever those "Heathen Chine'e". The Japanese, who inevitibly took their queues and most of their karaté knowledge from the Okinawans, ended up with a myriad of different styles all, more or less, based on the admixture of Okinawan "Té" and Chinese kung fu styles. The interesting things to me, from my various investigations is that the volume of material evident in many of these systems was pretty small.
> 
> The masters of many of these systems took a minimalist point of view regarding what they actually practiced, and what they taught. For instance, Funakoshi (Shotokan's founder) practiced only 3 or 4 kata, and tons of makiwara and other striking methods. Even Mitose, regardless of whether you believe, disbelieve, idolize, or intensely dislike, only practiced one or two kata, that were, essentially, Okinawan. Not Japanese, Not Chinese, but Okinawan... That is, if his press corp is to be believed.
> 
> All of that, simply says, that you are right. You get no more, nor no less out of any system that you endeavour to learn than the instructor is capable of giving you. After that, it becomes what you make it, or don't make it... And it then becomes something else. Much like most of the Kenpo that is out there nowadays.
> 
> I believe it is funny/strange, coming from a Tracy's background like I do, to watch what is happening, and sadly, in American Kenpo. No one has "the secret". Even Doctor Chapél, who is one of three people that I would want to study any form of Kenpo under, has, simply put, a path and an evolution. His material takes what he has learned from SGM Parker, and further personal evolution and become SL-4. It isn't for everyone. It is, however, an extremely intelligent path or "Journey". But the point is that for all the years that Tracy's was a commercial franchise system, It has had the same ups and downs.
> 
> Go to Ted Sumner's school and you will find, I do believe, that his applications of Tracy Karaté techniques are really different from the techniques taught in Tim Golby's schools in the Midwest. And all are, to a greater or lesser extent different from the Tracy's schools on the East Coast, and even more afield from the JT Will Schools, which started as Tracy based schools, and went on to become an interesting mix of Tracy's and Ed Parker's Kenpo, along with stuff that some of us have never seen before. Howver, it was all, basically, Tracy's Karaté, with the instructor's personal emphasis and insights. :idunno:
> 
> What that all gets you, if you could spend your entire life studying all the myriad systems, is all the instructors know. No one has the entire system, OF ANYTHING, not one, each has only her/his interpretation of that system, and that ... *IS ALL YOU GET*, because, that is all *THEY GOT*.
> 
> Ahem ... We now resume our regular broadcasting. :caffeine:


 
I think this is a very very good post, with some excellent points made.

Everyone's understanding is going to be specific to that person, and any students that they have will be a reflection of that, coupled with their own ability to understand the material and willingness to explore and experiment.


----------



## Doc

jazkiljok said:
			
		

> i don't know if anyone else has posed this question but when you say the commercial system is dependent on the individual knowledge and ability of the head instructor-- how exactly does that differ from other arts like for example-- Shotokan Karate, Okinawan Kempo, TKD and the myriad chinese arts?  couldn't you apply the same standard of competency in what is taught to all arts?


Excellent question sir and the answer is really a simple one. Most tend to think of Kenpo of the Ed Parker Lineage as being one body of work that 'evolved' over the years to whatever it is they are doing. This is actually far from the truth, but close to it as well.

Most rational people would have to agree that WHAT a student learned would depend on WHEN they learned. This is a biggie because it also reflects upon WHERE Mr. Parker was in his own study and knowledge. Ed Parker, (even if he wanted to), couldn't teach you something he didn't know himself.

*What many have not allowed for is that in the 'evolution of Ed Parker's Kenpo,' there is not ONE time line. 'Linearity' only belongs to the individual teacher. Each teacher represents their own different 'branch' from the source. However, they too also have their own evolutionary differences and generational teacher lineages, with subsequent branches, all stemming from the same source, but also 'tailored' either intentionally or unintentionally by the source for various reasons, including the sources limited knowledge at the time.*

By all accounts, Mr. Parker evolved through at least three (3) distinct evolutionary junctions BEFORE he created the 'commercial product.' He came to the mainland with HIS BRANCH of Professor's Chow's *"Kenpo Karate."* For those who studied with Parker when he first arrived, this was their 'branch' beginning. These students evolved from there, some in varying stages with Ed Parker, others moving on their own. This more simplistic era yielded the first book on "Kenpo-Karate," and its influence can be seen in the works of some of his earliest students and their branches.

Almost immediately, Ed Parker switched to studying a more sophisticated understanding of the martial sciences with Chinese, (and one Samoan) Masters, and entered his *"Chinese Kenpo* Phase." His study here yielded his second book, "Secrets of Chinese Karate," as he began an in-depth examination and study of "karate's" source and history and formed a new 'branch' in the Parker Lineage Tree.' His students from this branch are clearly 'different' from subsequent branches, not having learned the previous version of "kenpo-Karate." 

His third stage, after he was satisfied he had sufficient information to make his next transformation, is most significant to me because it yielded what became Mr. Parker's most sophisticated, and personal art which was *NOT commercialized, "American Kenpo."* Here Mr. Parker began his own PERSONAL evolution, as opposed to being in many respects, a student previously. 

"American Kenpo" was supposed to be, and is Mr. Parker's method of teaching all of the sophisticated aspects of the Chinese Sciences, but without the cultural accoutrements baggage, that slowed the learning process. He wanted to focus on street effectiveness and not foreign cultures and rituals, as all of the Asian Arts promoted at the time. He wanted a purely "American" version that presented the material from an American aspect, with American ideas and expressions instead of 'foreign mystic concepts and language.' Having been a part of the Chinese Kenpo Phase, I welcomed this new American Kenpo, and it is where I personally began to grow and understand my own previous training. Primarily it was labor intensive to teach and required a high level teacher of which there was only one. Ed Parker himself. You couldn't begin to explore American kenpo unless Ed Parker taught it to you himself, and you had to evolve with him over time if he wanted to teach you. However to proliferate the art, he had to create the next phase, which did not require him to be on the mat every night training students.

This next phase is where the confusion is generated. Before this, Mr. Parker was evolving in a direct timeline. The next 'branch,' called once again *"Kenpo Karate,"* was expressly created to proliferate and expand on a different version of Kenpo Karate that would allow students to branch out and form businesses, but more importantly, this is when Parker stopped teaching regularly in any school with minor exceptions.

This fourth branch however did not stop Parker from continuing to evolve *his American Kenpo third branch separately.* By his own admission, the 'new & improved Kenpo Karate' spawned the business of Kenpo, (with a huge nudge from Al Tracy) while "American Kenpo" reflected the depth of the art and contained evolving information that could not possibly be included in the 'business version' for a myriad of reasons. 

"Kenpo Karate" was tuned for success, and created for the American 'fast food franchise' market. It was based on abstract motion, which allowed it to be taught by anyone with a background in any martial art. Something that was important because the bulk of its instructors were recruited and imports from other styles of the art with a chance to make a buck off what they enjoyed doing. This is why Kenpo Karate has no real well defined base or basics, beyond conceptual ideas. You don't tell a 'business partner' black belt from Shotokan how to teach a forward bow, blocks, or kicks. You suggest ideas, and allow him to choose. It is also why I choose to remind you that only a handful of people began studying with Ed Parker as no experience white belts, and made it to black. Most came to Parker with previous experience and most of them as black belts already.

Kenpo Karate didn't really introduce much in the way of 'new' information. Concepts like 'tailoring, rearrangements, insertions, deletions, etc existed all along. What Parker uniquely did to sell kenpo Karate is he took it out of the hands of the experienced instructors who has always done this, and told students at white belt they COULD do it as well. Ed Parker flooded them with information before anyone could get bored and moves on to 'handball' or weight training, and used the belt as a 'reward.' He created a standard for the martial arts that had never existed before. He looked at terms like "McDojo" with pride. Introducing to a culture a method of learning self-defense, that previously had none, and then like McDonald's creating a degree of consistency that carried from school to school was genius.

Everyone agreed it wasn't the best way to learn the arts. That was never an argument. It is what it is. If you wanted a fine meal, you had to seek out the restaurant and chef with years of culinary skill and knowledge. That restaurant and chef may not be available to you. They may be too far away, or the waiting list might make them unavailable. But if you wanted to stop being hungry, get full, and satisfied until your next meal, McDonald's fit the bill. And the secret to success was not the great food (or art), but the consistency from franchise to franchise. No, it wasn't fine dining but you knew what you were getting because the menu was there in front of you, and the value was present because you knew what everything was going to cost, and about how long it was going to take. It presented a conceptual curriculum that could be interpreted by students and teachers alike, and kept everyone moving and happy.

Therefore, you see what makes this branch 'commercial' is it was created by Ed Parker to be commercial. It wasn't an art that someone 'watered down' as some suggest; it was created to be commercially successful in a business environment. There are many who choose to not teach it commercially, but that does not change the nature of the material which is wholly a commercial curriculum based on exploring motion. Kenpo Karate's redeeming quality, as Parker planned, was its teachers. The best will expound on the concepts and teach at a high level. The worse will follow the conceptual limited idea manuals, and expect that will be enough. For many it is, but like McDonald's, it has 'culinary limitations' inherent in the product, no matter how grand or altruistic your intentions. If what someone teaches is based on 'motion,' it is the commercial product. Unfortunately too many of the now teachers were pushed through the ranks with little real practical knowledge, Now they teach.

Me personally, I am still on the Chinese Kenpo to American Kenpo Branch that was NOT based on motion and I am not the only one. Sigung LaBounty always comes to mind because we communicate quite often. You can call 'Motion Kenpo" American Kenpo or EPAK but it is not, according to Mr. Parker. However, in the end it's all semantics, and if it works for you who really cares. The main thing is to NOT assume everyone is or should be doing the same thing and argue about techniques, or 32/24/16, or the order of forms. Let's fight about function. That makes more sense to me.

Below is a MartialTalk post from the archive of 2002. I have no idea whom it is(AMK?), other than they appear to be someone I've come in contact with. If they read and recognize, I'm sure they'll chime in. Thanks.


> 10-13-2002, 01:21 PM
> amk
> Guest
> 
> Motion or Commercial Kenpo
> 
> First off I am not putting anyone down, nor saying that any one is better than any one else. I have been fortunate to have trained with many different instructors one on one, and in seminars as well. So let me ask this: What is American Kenpo? According to many, it is the Study of Motion. You learn techniques and the motion that is used in the techniques from 3 points of view, being 1st doing the technique (i.e. Delayed Sword), 2nd doing the attack (i.e. Front right hand lapel grab), and 3rd watching 2 other people practice the technique in 1st and 2nd person situations.
> 
> Now the time that I spent with Mr. Huk Planas, he told me and others that American Kenpo is: "The Study of Motion." Mr. Planas talked about the old days and how they had 3-8 variations on every technique, and when Mr. Parker wanted to make manuals, they then condensed the information to make it more acceptable for a manual, which was the way Mr. Parker thought he could spread the art further. He also added that they all had writers cramp from just doing one variation. New techniques were created to complete categories of motion.
> 
> This seems obvious to be a new system of learning Kenpo based on motion, which would be a "Motion Kenpo" or "Commercial Kenpo" system to me, whatever you want to call it. A system that was developed not inferior to anything else, as the quality of student does directly relate to the level that their instructor delivers to, and demands of their students.
> 
> Now according to Mr. Sean Kelley, Mr. Parker rarely taught after this new system was developed. The reason I can make this statement is that according to Mr. Kelley, Mr. Parker was on the Road with Elvis most of the time in the Early 70's, and that would mean that under the new guidelines that most of what was taught was based on Motion, not by Mr. Parker, but by his students. Mr. Parker's students were heavily involved in creating the new system, as Mr. Planas helped with the category completion, and writing of the technique manuals. What does all of this mean? Well basically it means that prior to this time period of the Early 70's when this was created, would have been different in the teachings. So if people like Dr. Chap&#233;l, or Sigung Steven LaBounty, etc. were studying Kenpo before this time frame it wouldn't have been "Motion Kenpo". The main difference between the two can be summarized by the following viewpoints as well:
> 
> According to Mr. Planas: "Their is no write or wrong way to do a technique, as long as you obey the rules of motion."
> 
> According to Dr. Chap&#233;l, American Kenpo SubLevel Four is learned and practiced in a way that forces you to do things that increase the likely hood of victory. Rearrangement and other aspects of "Motion Kenpo" are removed to stack the odds in your favor, like Positive and Negative Body Posture, Destructive Sequencing, and other aspects that can't be rearranged with out removing those advantages given to us through sciences of body mechanics.
> 
> In my time with Dr. Chap&#233;l, he has taught me to train under stressful realistic situations, and deal with people that really know how to attack properly, or even at an expert level where they grab you in a wrist lock before you know it, and then what to do. That is different than my time with Mr. Planas, as he liked to talk about reading (reading the attack), and he recommends that you train using a two step approach, to give you time to read the attack.
> 
> Dr. Chap&#233;l, has given me material, and experiences to make techniques real, having been K.O.'d by him, and had more than above par training with his students as well. Basically he has given me more of the internal aspects of the Martial Arts /Sciences than anyone else, even going outside Kenpo.
> 
> Clearly their are aspects of the Martial Arts that are just missing from many instructors in the Martial Arts, that Dr. Chap&#233;l has addressed within American Kenpo; Destructive Sequencing, Anatomical Alignment, Positive Body Posture, Negative Body Posture, etc. I have friends that have studied for years in Long Fist, Aikido, Hung Gar, Choy Li Fut, White Eyebrow, and many others that have been amazed at what I have shown them that Dr. Chap&#233;l, has taught me. I think they have slanted foreheads from all the Homer Simpson: "Douuuu!" with a slap on the forehead, when I tell them why they are doing something the way they are. The truth is, that I only know of it because of Sub Level 4 training.
> 
> One more story that has been passed down by Mr. Sean Kelley, is a story that Jimmy Woo used to teach at the Pasadena school, and he talked of internal aspects of the arts, and even talked of one in which you could avoid death via strangulation or hanging, and someone he told this to, died of asphyxiation attempting the technique. Mr. Parker found out about this and their relationship ended as the students were obviously not ready for this type of information. So who is to say that Mr. Parker didn't think that some were ready for some the information and passed it on to some and not others. Just as he did with the knife material, and other aspects that Mr. Parker taught different things to different people. Enough of me being on my soap box, I just feel that some people have been unfairly ganged up on, and stories twisted and turned, without fully trying to comprehend what is being said. These people have taken some of the information and taken offense to it, as if they are doing something bad, and that is not my statement. I am saying that using logic and common sense you should be able to determine that their has been more than one system of American Kenpo, and that many people know many different things. Also having met with some of these people's instructors it becomes more clear that they attack because they have lost many students to Dr. Chap&#233;l, and the fact that many have been Black Belts makes it hurt even worse. These are my observations, no offense is meant, I just needed to state the things I have witnessed and felt.


----------



## Doc

Continuing:

The big distinction between the commercial aspect of Kenpo Karate and more traditional arts lie in their intended purpose. Most were designed to teach specific things before there was any commercial aspect to the arts. Some to teach fighting, healing, medicine, etc, and others to teach discipline through sporting activities, and still other 'way' arts designed to foster an inner peace. None of these arts were created specifically to be a money making enterprise, until "kenpo Karate." At some point many arts have sprung up to take advantage of the marketplace, as well as other older more traditional arts began to modify their training to accomodate older men, women, and children. But the difference here is these arts changed to make money, whereas Kenpo Karate was created to make money therefore even if you choose to teach for free, the curriculum is still a commercial product, with all the attendant limitations.


----------



## Hand Sword

Thank you sir!

Those were great posts!

:asian:


----------



## Carol

Hand Sword said:
			
		

> Thank you sir!
> 
> Those were great posts!
> 
> :asian:


 
Amen.  Thank you both Dan and Dr. Chapél :asian:


----------



## marlon

Hello master Chapel,
i am wondering what you would recommend to someone interested in undersrtanding and learning to apply what you teach to do on thier own?  Are thier concepts and practices that you could share that would allow someone who does not train in SL-4 or even EPAK to see and grow from this knowldge that you have rfecieved from Ed Parker.  Without the infinite insights highly specific terminology could you explain a way for myself to "get it" at least on a level that could help me grow my kempo in that direction?

Thank you

Respectfully,
Marlon
P.S. perhaps i should have started a new thread?


----------



## Doc

marlon said:
			
		

> Hello master Chapel,
> i am wondering what you would recommend to someone interested in undersrtanding and learning to apply what you teach to do on thier own?  Are thier concepts and practices that you could share that would allow someone who does not train in SL-4 or even EPAK to see and grow from this knowldge that you have rfecieved from Ed Parker.  Without the infinite insights highly specific terminology could you explain a way for myself to "get it" at least on a level that could help me grow my kempo in that direction?
> 
> Thank you
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon
> P.S. perhaps i should have started a new thread?


Hello sir. For the record, 'mister' or "doc" is fine, "master" is for others. If you follow any of the theads on forums where I post, one of things I always speak of is how difficult it is to relay information this way.

The particular knowledge utilized in the teaching and applications of SubLevel Four Kenpo are my interpretations of what Ed Parker taught me, and what he did in his own applications. Although complex, it is actually easy to learn, if not understand, but only from a qualified instructor. It is labor intensive and intricate requiring personal discipline, and even the most experienced instructor may not even observe and recognize the application mechanisms. It is comprised of multiple sciences that all come together through the conduit of the human body, and the applications found within dynamic human interaction.

Absent standing in front of an instructor, it is impossible sir. This is why Parker created Kenpo Karate. Because he didn't have to be there and students could interpret anything that worked for them. Kenpo Karate is 90% concepts and 10% principles. SubLevel Four Kenpo is the opposite at 90% principles and 10% concepts. Sorry I couldn't help you sir.


----------



## marlon

Thanks anyway, Doc

Respectfully,
Marlon



			
				Doc said:
			
		

> Hello sir. For the record, 'mister' or "doc" is fine, "master" is for others. If you follow any of the theads on forums where I post, one of things I always speak of is how difficult it is to relay information this way.
> 
> The particular knowledge utilized in the teaching and applications of SubLevel Four Kenpo are my interpretations of what Ed Parker taught me, and what he did in his own applications. Although complex, it is actually easy to learn, if not understand, but only from a qualified instructor. It is labor intensive and intricate requiring personal discipline, and even the most experienced instructor may not even observe and recognize the application mechanisms. It is comprised of multiple sciences that all come together through the conduit of the human body, and the applications found within dynamic human interaction.
> 
> Absent standing in front of an instructor, it is impossible sir. This is why Parker created Kenpo Karate. Because he didn't have to be there and students could interpret anything that worked for them. Kenpo Karate is 90% concepts and 10% principles. SubLevel Four Kenpo is the opposite at 90% principles and 10% concepts. Sorry I couldn't help you sir.


----------



## jazkiljok

Doc said:
			
		

> Continuing:
> 
> The big distinction between the commercial aspect of Kenpo Karate and more traditional arts lie in their intended purpose. Most were designed to teach specific things before there was any commercial aspect to the arts. Some to teach fighting, healing, medicine, etc, and others to teach discipline through sporting activities, and still other 'way' arts designed to foster an inner peace. None of these arts were created specifically to be a money making enterprise, until "kenpo Karate." At some point many arts have sprung up to take advantage of the marketplace, as well as other older more traditional arts began to modify their training to accomodate older men, women, and children. But the difference here is these arts changed to make money, whereas Kenpo Karate was created to make money therefore even if you choose to teach for free, the curriculum is still a commercial product, with all the attendant limitations.





First off, thanks for the lengthy and informative reply. Well worth the read for those interested in the topic.

So- what I think Im getting from this is that a money making operation has by necessity a laissez faire curriculum that tolerates significant differences in how one learns basics, teks, forms from school to school even though it has some basic franchise guidelines whereas the MA traditional schools curriculum will focus on specifics that have been handed down generation to generation; i.e.  a round house kick or a kata will both look and be taught the same from shotokan school to school but the same couldnt be said for kenpo karate.


It seems that, while the material itself in traditional arts molds the master-to-be into a close copy of previous mastersin the kenpo karate school, the master-to-be molds the material to his/her own abilities, which then becomes a new template of the master and by extension of that- what is taught in class.

yes?


----------



## Doc

jazkiljok said:
			
		

> First off, thanks for the lengthy and informative reply. Well worth the read for those interested in the topic.
> 
> So- what I think Im getting from this is that a money making operation has by necessity a laissez faire curriculum that tolerates significant differences in how one learns basics, teks, forms from school to school even though it has some basic franchise guidelines whereas the MA traditional schools curriculum will focus on specifics that have been handed down generation to generation; i.e.  a round house kick or a kata will both look and be taught the same from shotokan school to school but the same couldnt be said for kenpo karate.
> 
> 
> It seems that, while the material itself in traditional arts molds the master-to-be into a close copy of previous mastersin the kenpo karate school, the master-to-be molds the material to his/her own abilities, which then becomes a new template of the master and by extension of that- what is taught in class.
> 
> yes?


Very well said sir. It also helps to explain to lack of quality basics, and well as the non existent consistency even within the same school or association between students.

At one level, all of my students do the same thing the same way. No variation, just correct within the curriculum. (Kinda like the old chop-sockey flicks where there are a couple of hundred students in the courtyard all moving the same on an exercise in unison.) This is learning the abcs and vocabulary. They can't change the spelling of a word or rearrange a sentence yet, because they don't understand 'sentence structure' yet. This is blasphamy in Kenpo-Karate circles where 'self expression' is more important than proper structure.


----------



## Brian Jones

Great Post Doc.

  By the way I wonder if "AMK" might not just be Andrew King from Columbus, Ohio.  I knew Andrew when we both trained with Peter Galupo in Columbus. Andrew just passed the bar by the way.

Brian Jones


----------



## Doc

Brian Jones said:
			
		

> Great Post Doc.
> 
> By the way I wonder if "AMK" might not just be Andrew King from Columbus, Ohio.  I knew Andrew when we both trained with Peter Galupo in Columbus. Andrew just passed the bar by the way.
> 
> Brian Jones


You know it could be Andrew, but I don't seem to remember him posting here. I knew he passed the bas, he and I stay in touch. Glad to see you're still around sir.


----------



## jfarnsworth

Brian Jones said:
			
		

> ...By the way I wonder if "AMK" might not just be Andrew King from Columbus, Ohio. I knew Andrew when we both trained with Peter Galupo in Columbus. Andrew just passed the bar by the way...


Not to side track but how long ago did you train with Mr. Galupo? He visits the studio I train at once a year when Mr. Wedlake comes in to do a seminar. Did you ever come to Mt. Vernon with him by chance??


----------



## marlon

someone once said do not seek to copy a master seek what the master sought.  Perhaps going to the basics and concepts of the oriental atrs that Ed Parker looked to will help to furnish what is missing...and why not in any case.  i know that F.Villari did not encourage this b/c he wanted to be the only source, however, by all accounts Ed Parker was not like that.  Perhaps, someone teaching you sl4 or what not will only give you thier understanding, if you go to the source you can find your own and grow...after all after a certain amount of training the only good reason to continue is to grow(imo)

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Brian Jones

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> Not to side track but how long ago did you train with Mr. Galupo? He visits the studio I train at once a year when Mr. Wedlake comes in to do a seminar. Did you ever come to Mt. Vernon with him by chance??


 
  I still train with Peter every Monday. I drive down from Fostoria (about 1 hr. and 45. min)  to train with him and then I go over to train in Modern Arnis before heading home.  I was at the seminar last year with Mr. Wedlake ( we did Blinding Sacrifice, Intercepting the Ram)  I was the one with the AKKI patch if you remember back that far.  Sorry I didn't get down there a couple of weeks ago. Peter said it was a good seminar.

Brian Jones


----------



## jfarnsworth

I remember seeing someone there with an akki patch on. I didn't really stare but I guess should have introduced myself since there were guests in our studio. Next time I will. And yes, that seminar was really good on body mechanics.


----------



## kuroshinja

My name is James Lee. I am trying to contact Peter Galupo. He knows me from a seminar that Andrew King hosted for Dr. Chapel. Please have him contact me. Starblock@juno.com.


----------



## kenpo_cory

I guess this question is more for Mr. Chapel but everyones opinion is always welcome. Would you consider Tracy Kenpo "motion kenpo" ?


----------



## Doc

kenpo_cory said:


> I guess this question is more for Mr. Chapel but everyones opinion is always welcome. Would you consider Tracy Kenpo "motion kenpo" ?



Well yes, and no. The Tracy organization has a huge dichotomy of information that covers the full spectrum of the martial arts, much like Ed Parker. The biggest difference is the Tracy's began their organization from this perspective. Whatever the art needed, Al was not shy about finding the best at it, and than hiring them to teach and infuse their art with the knowledge. But this has created, once again like Parker, a great disparity in geographic schools, and more importantly their instructors. Like most teachers, Al Tracy decided who learned and what they learned. Some "need" some things, and others don't.  

So you can find more "motion" based teaching like the Parker Commercial method, to more sophisticated anatomical instruction. Last year I taught a class with Ted Sumner and although we taught differently, we were covering essentially the same material.

Much like the Parker Lineage, you never know what you get until you get with the teacher.


----------



## kenpo_cory

You wouldn't happen to have any students that teach in southern Louisiana would you? I haven't found any kenpo schools that interest me here. I work at a prison here and I'm not interested in wasting my time with something that will get me hurt or possibly worse.


----------



## Doc

kenpo_cory said:


> You wouldn't happen to have any students that teach in southern Louisiana would you? I haven't found any kenpo schools that interest me here. I work at a prison here and I'm not interested in wasting my time with something that will get me hurt or possibly worse.



Unfortunately no sir. I would love to have you as a student. On any given night at our home school in Los Angeles, the police, sheriff, and federal agents out number civilian students easily. We have more fire power in the school than most small police departments. My law enforcement material is used all over to rave reviews. My Sheriff's Deputy's assigned to custody love the material. I got to get over in your area and share some things with you.


----------



## Flying Crane

kenpo_cory said:


> You wouldn't happen to have any students that teach in southern Louisiana would you? I haven't found any kenpo schools that interest me here. I work at a prison here and I'm not interested in wasting my time with something that will get me hurt or possibly worse.


 

I don't know Louisiana very well, but Kenpodave, a member here, has a school in Shreveport.  You might send him a message.  

Dave Teaches Tracy kenpo, and has studied with some of the very senior people within the Tracy group.  You might find it worth your while.

I don't know how set you are on SL4, but considering it isn't available in your area, this might be an excellent option.


----------



## Doc

Flying Crane said:


> I don't know Louisiana very well, but Kenpodave, a member here, has a school in Shreveport.  You might send him a message.
> 
> Dave Teaches Tracy kenpo, and has studied with some of the very senior people within the Tracy group.  You might find it worth your while.
> 
> I don't know how set you are on SL4, but considering it isn't available in your area, this might be an excellent option.



Sounds good to me.


----------



## kenpo_cory

Doc said:


> Unfortunately no sir. I would love to have you as a student. On any given night at our home school in Los Angeles, the police, sheriff, and federal agents out number civilian students easily. We have more fire power in the school than most small police departments. My law enforcement material is used all over to rave reviews. My Sheriff's Deputy's assigned to custody love the material. I got to get over in your area and share some things with you.


 
I wish I lived closer to your area, it would be an honor to be one of your students. Since you mentioned it, we will have to talk sometime and discuss what it would take to get you in this neck of the woods and share some of your knowledge with me.


----------



## kenpo_cory

Flying Crane said:


> I don't know Louisiana very well, but Kenpodave, a member here, has a school in Shreveport. You might send him a message.
> 
> Dave Teaches Tracy kenpo, and has studied with some of the very senior people within the Tracy group. You might find it worth your while.
> 
> I don't know how set you are on SL4, but considering it isn't available in your area, this might be an excellent option.


 
That wouldn't be Dave Hopper would it? I was just looking at the Tracy's website today and saw him listed. I was considering talking to him actually.


----------



## Doc

kenpo_cory said:


> I wish I lived closer to your area, it would be an honor to be one of your students. Since you mentioned it, we will have to talk sometime and discuss what it would take to get you in this neck of the woods and share some of your knowledge with me.


Sounds good!


----------



## marlon

I am curious to understand what is sl4's opinion on forms training and what is the % of emphasis on forms in sl-4 and why?

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Flying Crane

kenpo_cory said:


> That wouldn't be Dave Hopper would it? I was just looking at the Tracy's website today and saw him listed. I was considering talking to him actually.


 

Yes, that is Dave Hopper.  I am sure he would be happy to talk with you.


----------



## Doc

marlon said:


> I am curious to understand what is sl4's opinion on forms training and what is the % of emphasis on forms in sl-4 and why?
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon



Well Marlon those are interesting questions you pose, however SL-4 doesnt have an opinion.  However because I am the acknowledged expert in the SubLevel Four Lineage of Ed Parkers Work, Ill see if I can shed some light for you.

Traditionally the Chinese had two methodologies of teaching and conveying information. They had the quick study warrior versions of their arts, and they had the scholarly preservationist versions as well.

The former was about learning warrior skills as quickly as possible for obvious reasons, for those in the service of the Emperor in his armies. The emphasis was on applications and weapons skills as primary tools of survival and assault. After all the average life span was short in general, and for warriors specifically, even shorter. The so-called scholarly old masters of the movies were few and far between.

It is this aspect in modern times that was deemphasized, because of a lack of need in modern warfare. With the invention of gunpowder, there was a dampening effect on this type of training, and over time it diminished greatly. Thus, the emphasis moved to preserving the scholarly works of study that the Chinese pioneered in the understanding of human anatomy over centuries of experimentation.

This is important because it helps to understand why things were taught the way they were, and why when the arts were exported to other cultures, there was so much misinformation, and misunderstanding of the methodology and the knowledge itself. It also points out why the information is virtually lost in modern times and why the Chinese have always been so protective of their cultural heritage in this area.

What we see in the old movies were those training and being trained to be scholars, through scholarly archived methods. To this end, the Chinese placed a great deal of emphasis on forms and set training, and then extrapolated the information for application out of this training.

It was through this methodology the information could be preserved, and passed from generation to generation. Forms and Sets, in conjunction with flowery metaphoric phrases to describe the action, as well as the physical actions themselves as taught, stood alone as encyclopedias and repositories of the great works of the scholars that came before each generation. 

When a new discovery was made, (or an old one disproved), a form or set could be slightly modified to contain and present the new information without much effort, insuring information was always current and up to date. So the primary purpose became preservation over function, with much of the applications becoming vague to following generations of scholars without the constant flow of expendable warriors to keep them on track.

Thus, when they arts began to be exported, other cultures misinterpreted information. Many presumed that every move had a corresponding application, and this was completely erroneous. Many of the moves that appear impractical in combat are simply indices of preserved information that requires a knowledgeable and scholarly interpretation.

With the advent of the modern era of the arts, many moved to a non-traditional method away from the Forms/Sets Encyclopedic Method, in favor of the old warrior method rediscovered. Notably, Kenpo in the William K.S. Chow Lineage began the unique process of empty hand warrior training with all emphasis being placed on experiential applications of extreme physicality. 

The forms and sets were de-emphasized over a then unique, hands on, and a pass/fail approach to build knowledge and practical skills. If something worked consistently, it was retained. If it didnt, it was discarded immediately.

This method was revolutionary for its day, with all arts being tradition bound to a particularly culture and ideology preserving methodology first, and practical application information a distant second. Edmund Parker Sr. always gave his first and last Kenpo Teacher credit for this innovative approach that he carried with him, and continued into his own unique and varied methods of development.

When Ed Parker first made the switch to his versions of Chinese Kenpo, he followed the old school method of forms and sets initially, but found this too restrictive for his self-defense approach.

Ultimately in his commercial work, although unintended, the self-defense techniques became the complete focus, and forms gave way to competition emphasis over information and application support.

SubLevel Four Kenpo is a hybrid of the old, and new methods, which are what Mr. Parker, intended to create. He intended to take his experience in the traditional Chinese Arts and in Chinese Kenpo, and infuse his philosophy into an American kenpo. I am in agreement with Mr. Parker, and it is in my view the intended direction that modern self-defense arts should take depending upon ones commitment level. But Parker allowed for varying commitment levels and this is why he created different methods, so students would be allowed to seek the level of their desire, and be rewarded accordingly.

SubLevel Four Kenpo has a higher commitment level than most commercial versions of Parkers works. It requires strict basics and an unforgiving demand for basic skills before newer material can be presented, regardless of time, rank, or supposed experience.

As envisioned by Mr. Parker, the self-defense techniques are the center of the art, supported by the basic skills that the forms and sets provide. Much of the complex information of the old world forms and sets, are presented in their practical application form in the technique, for a more rapid assimilation intellectually coupled with a functional understanding infused, thereby putting the information into immediate context, and providing a mental point of reference and focus. But this also means self-defense techniques are not open to interpretation. They are designed to be ultimately functional with no tailoring or re-arrangement concepts necessary. Also, because they contain such significant information archived in the execution, any changes would destroy the encyclopedic functions.

Forms and sets insure the teaching, and presentation of basic skills. Stance Set 101 for example, not only teaches the basic stances, but how they function in application and transition. Blocking Set 101 teaches all the base blocks as well as how they function in application in conjunction with footwork. Kick Set 101 does the same with base kicks, etc.

SubLevel Four also has a unique bridging component termed Anticipated Offensive/Defensive (A.O.D.) Training. On appearance of some of its drills, it may seem similar to some Filipino Training. Upon application it may appear similar to Jeet Kun Do training. They are neither, but share the practical application themes of the other interpretations, but contain unique information of application. The A.O.D. techniques are quite extensive and teach explosive application modification of default techniques as well.

They are specifically designed to bridge the gap between the self-defense techniques and the forms and sets. They take a base technique, and when infused with A.O.D. learned skills and knowledge raise the level of the application of the techniques. Further, it answers questions of when attacks are known to be imminent, which may preclude the execution of an Attacking Mace default response over an A.O.D. Attacking Mace response, which will occur more expeditiously, aggressive, and more direct in seeking a final conclusion.

So in conclusion, SubLevel Four Kenpo maintains three (3) perspectives; Forms/Sets, A.O.D., and Self-Defense Techniques. All are equally valuable, with all supporting the other, with an obvious emphasis on the self-defense techniques in a Self-Defense System.


----------



## marlon

Thank you sir, that was clear and precise as well as encyclopedic in nature and function.  i appreciate it very much.  Just to be sure, do you teach the same forms as are taught in the commercial schools?

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Doc

marlon said:


> Thank you sir, that was clear and precise as well as encyclopedic in nature and function.  i appreciate it very much.  Just to be sure, do you teach the same forms as are taught in the commercial schools?
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon



No. The last of the original forms end at Short Three. Everything after that was specifically created for competition presentation in tournaments, including all of the weapons forms. I do not touch any of those because they cannot be reconciled with good body mechanics in their entirety.


----------



## marlon

Doc said:


> . The so-called scholarly old masters of the movies were few and far between.
> 
> 
> and,yet, alive and well in California it seems
> 
> Were the A.O.D.'s crerated by Mr.Parker or yourself as a continuation of his work?
> 
> and with all due respect sir, how are you perserving this encyclopedia of knowledge that you understadn so wellcalled SL4?  I know the time to write things out and the difficulties of video are nearly insurmountable road blocks...so i guess the question really is:  Is SL 4 secured and alive for futur generations?
> 
> with great respect and a desire to learn
> 
> Marlon


----------



## Doc

marlon said:


> Doc said:
> 
> 
> 
> . The so-called scholarly old masters of the movies were few and far between.
> 
> 
> and,yet, alive and well in California it seems
> 
> Were the A.O.D.'s crerated by Mr.Parker or yourself as a continuation of his work?
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. Parker discussed this with many, but found the concept so intellectually demanding, few in the commercial arena were interested. What he did was when he initially attempted to introduce the concept, he built them around a formulaic approach designed to encourage "sparring" in the schools, and thus support his tournament(s). Personal students like Dennis Conatser know, and understand them as the "Freestyle Formulas."
> 
> As hard as it may seem to fathom, in the old days Parker's Kenpo Schools had a rep of not producing tournament fighters. You couldn't even put a team together out of one school.
> 
> Chuck Sullivan, (Steve Sanders Instructor) running the Inglewood school on LaBrea and Century with guys like John Henderson, emphasized hard nosed sparring. Tom Kelly, also at the Santa Monica School pushed the physicality of free sparring, producing young guns like Rick Carthew. There were others like Steve LaBounty, Ralph Castellanos, Brian Strain, etc and later came Bob White who set the gold standard for continued excellence and class out of his school in Costa Mesa.
> 
> The "Freestyle Formulas" were intended to infuse some of that material, but fell short with most choosing to teach a more simplistic approach, that was actually more in line with the idea and rules of open tournament competition.
> 
> In my teaching, I returned to the original goals of the concept, began reformulating them accordingly, and changed the name to something more appropriate to their application. They may be used limitedly for some sparring, but they encompass a more "street perspective" to the concept and contain elements that would not be allowed in competition.
> 
> 
> 
> and with all due respect sir, how are you perserving this encyclopedia of knowledge that you understand so well called SL4?  I know the time to write things out and the difficulties of video are nearly insurmountable road blocks...so i guess the question really is:  Is SL 4 secured and alive for futur generations?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Absolutely sir. I've been writing the SL-4 material since the seventies. Initially with Ed Parker's input and guidance. It is VERY time consuming and difficult, and clearly there is much that cannot be written down persé, but exist within the frame work of the material to be deciphered by knowledgeable students. Mr. Parker recognized the difficulty but was also committed to the expansion process of his other material. I took the notes and kept them.
> 
> Thus, the inflexibility of techniques which I designed from the ground up to contain all that is necessary to be functional, even with minor variances in attacks. Long term results, function, and an archiving of the information are the paramount goals, over quick skills that dissipate just as quickly.
> 
> Oddly enough, it doesn't take any longer to learn for a dedicated student, but requires a higher level of instruction. This why expansion has always been difficult for us. We don't care about the money or size of the group, over and above the preservation of the high standards of the art out of respect to Mr. Parker. But few are qualified to teach the material, and we do not assimilate ranks or experience. Everyone starts from, and are taught from the beginning with an evaluation of basic skills and an understanding of the proper methodologies for long term success, and the maintenance of the information. Mr. Parker is the progenitor and was a genius. We like to think the method, along with the information we teach proves he was smarter than most know.
Click to expand...


----------



## Kraiguar

_Mr. Parker told us don't be like the man at the bottom of the well, who when looking up at the sky thinks that portion of the sky he see's is all there really is to heaven. ~Peace and Blessings~_

_"Remembering is for those who forget"._


----------



## Doc

Kraiguar said:


> _Mr. Parker told us don't be like the man at the bottom of the well, who when looking up at the sky thinks that portion of the sky he see's is all there really is to heaven. ~Peace and Blessings~_
> 
> _"Remembering is for those who forget"._



What's up Mr. Smith?


----------



## Kraiguar

_Trying never to forget Doc, the days at the Rio Theater when you use to spin the projector showing Shaft over and over as we worked on techniques taught by you in real time in a realistic situation against Stanley "Tookie" Williams and the Crips street gang from that era._
_We were effective because we also developed the proper attitude needed to survive and escape those truly deadly times and circumstances._
_It can not just look good, it has to work._

_We should all thank God everyday for the gift of Mr. Parker and the brilliant mind that is __Ron Chapel. ~Peace and Blessings~_


----------



## Doc

Kraiguar said:


> _Trying never to forget Doc, the days at the Rio Theater when you use to spin the projector showing Shaft over and over as we worked on techniques taught by you in real time in a realistic situation against Stanley "Tookie" Williams and the Crips street gang from that era._
> _We were effective because we also developed the proper attitude needed to survive and escape those truly deadly times and circumstances._
> _It can not just look good, it has to work._
> 
> _We should all thank God everyday for the gift of Mr. Parker and the brilliant mind that is __Ron Chapel. ~Peace and Blessings~_



Man you are going waaay back. I had forgot about that. Which Purple Belt was that, that kicked Tookie in the balls? Those were some rough days, and if you couldn't fight, you couldn't hang. I remember our best fighters were guys like you, Lenny, Harvey, Vontré, Nitty, Cruise, all high school students. We had all of you "kids" fighting adult war veterans and winning. Memories sir. Thanks for jogging an old man's memory. Email me sometime buddy.


----------



## kenpo_cory

Doc said:


> No. The last of the original forms end at Short Three. Everything after that was specifically created for competition presentation in tournaments, including all of the weapons forms. I do not touch any of those because they cannot be reconciled with good body mechanics in their entirety.


 
Thank you for confirming what my instructor always told me. He doesn't teach any of the original forms past Long 1. When i mentioned this to other high ranking kenpo instructors i was told he was robbing me of knowledge.


----------



## Doc

kenpo_cory said:


> Thank you for confirming what my instructor always told me. He doesn't teach any of the original forms past Long 1. When i mentioned this to other high ranking kenpo instructors i was told he was robbing me of knowledge.


There is a measure of knowledge in all of the Commercial Kenpo system, some good, some bad. There is specific knowledge in Form Four that I find valuable as an example, but the form as a whole doesn't conform to our interpretation philosophy or physical requirements. Therefore for us, the information is covered elsewhere. To not teach those forms is an instructor prerogative. The information may be conveyed in many ways, and Ed Parker never mandated any of it, and allowed instructors to use Big Red as a guide, not a "bible." Any "high ranking" instructor should know that.


----------



## Kraiguar

_Doc, some say that it was Gary "Rabbit" Goodman who executed that groin kick. But Stanlely "Tookie" Williams himself said that it was Two Time IKC Champion in the Junior Division 1969-1970 Vountia Moss Jr. _
_~Peace and Blessings~_
_www.kraiguarsmith.com_


----------



## Doc

Kraiguar said:


> _Doc, some say that it was Gary "Rabbit" Goodman who executed that groin kick. But Stanlely "Tookie" Williams himself said that it was Two Time IKC Champion in the Junior Division 1969-1970 Vountia Moss Jr. _
> _~Peace and Blessings~_
> _www.kraiguarsmith.com_



No, it wasn't Gary or Tré. Both Goodman and Moss were green belts at the time. This guy was a pretty quiet purple belt. I can see his face, but can't pull up a name. It was significant because the kid didn't really want to fight, but when the older guys like Cliff Stewart insured it was to be a fair fight, he went ahead and took care of business. As I recall you and Moss came out of Shorin Ryu at PASLA, and Gary came out of Kobayashi with Bill Short.


----------



## DavidCC

Would one of you guys be willing to tell this story from the beginning?  How did you arrange to have purple belts kicking Crips in the nads? :btg:

Doc this is why we need to write your biography... I know you have 1000 stories at least as fascinating as this.


----------



## Kraiguar

_Doc, it is true that Gary Goodman came from Willy Short and Vountria and I were students of Eugene Davis and the PASLA Workshop at the Balboa Theater in South Central Los Angeles. Vountria and I became students of Steve (Sanders) Muhammad in 1967 along with "Little" Steve Nelson we were his first three original students._
_In 1968 Vountria and I were green belt and purple respectively and in 1970 we were promoted to brown belt along with Al Harvey original student of Frank "Nitty" Wilson who was an original student of Count Dante from Chicago._
_After leaving Willy Short and joining our school that same year Ricky Heath Jr., Vountria, Al "Hot Dog" Harvey, myself and others would fight against John Natividad, Darnell Garcia, Bob White, Howard Jackson and many noted fighters of that time in team and divisional tournament competition and yes we were 15, 16, 17 years of age and having lots of fun doing battle with these great men, true pioneers._
_Vountria, Hot Dog and I wore the Kenpo patch with honor before the BKF was even a dream and were diligent in our studies as you well should know._
_Now, as a founding member of the BKF I can tell you who walked in after the door was already open. We were seniors to all but the founders and teachers which included Sijo Muhammad, Guru Cliff Stewart, Grandmaster Jerry Smith, Dr. Ron Chapel, Ted Taylor and a few others._
_In 1970 Frank "Nitty" became the first black Belt and in 1971 Vountria, Hot Dog, Ricky, and Kraiguar were promoted to Black Belt together._
_Now you being somewhat of a genius even then as a UCLA student, in 1970 assisted with the business of running the Rio Theater and the BKF were hired as Security to keep the Crips in check when needed, which was more other than not. _
_Doc, remember the sign you posted on the front door that read "Owned and Operated by the BKF"._
_In conclusion I never said it was Vountria who kicked Tookie, I said that Tookie believed that it was Vountria and when he was almost crying in pain in the lobby area I was there along with Vountria, Steve and others escorting him and the rest out the door._
_It is true, I think it is time we all write our biography. _
_"Over every possessor of knowledge, their is one who is more knowing"._
_~Peace and Blessings~_
_www.kraiguarsmith.com_


----------



## Doc

Kraiguar said:


> _Doc, it is true that Gary Goodman came from Willy Short and Vountria and I were students of Eugene Davis and the PASLA Workshop at the Balboa Theater in South Central Los Angeles.
> _


_
The old Balboa theater on South Vermont Ave, several miles from Manual Arts High School. Last I heard Gene was working for D.O.D.



			Vountria and I became students of Steve (Sanders) Muhammad in 1967 along with "Little" Steve Nelson we were his first three original students.
		
Click to expand...

That's right. Most don't know that.



			In 1968 Vountria and I were green belt and purple respectively and in 1970 we were promoted to brown belt along with Al Harvey original student of Frank "Nitty" Wilson who was an original student of Count Dante from Chicago.
		
Click to expand...

Frank Wilson was the fastest martial artist I ever saw. Fighting with him and fast guys like you made me stay fast.



			After leaving Willy Short and joining our school that same year Ricky Heath Jr., Vountria, Al "Hot Dog" Harvey, myself and others ..
		
Click to expand...

Ricky Heath was also up there in the speed department, along with my recruit from Ark Wong's, Lenny Ferguson.



			... would fight against John Natividad, Darnell Garcia, Bob White, Howard Jackson and many noted fighters of that time in team and divisional tournament competition and yes we were 15, 16, 17 years of age and having lots of fun doing battle with these great men, true pioneers.
		
Click to expand...

Some of the greatest ever.



			Vountria, Hot Dog and I wore the Kenpo patch with honor before the BKF was even a dream and were diligent in our studies as you well should know.
Now, as a founding member of the BKF I can tell you who walked in after the door was already open.

In 1970 Frank "Nitty" became the first black Belt and in 1971 Vountria, Hot Dog, Ricky, and Kraiguar were promoted to Black Belt together.
		
Click to expand...

You guys were the original core group of young black belts.



			Now you being somewhat of a genius even then as a UCLA student, in 1970 assisted with the business of running the Rio Theater and the BKF were hired as Security to keep the Crips in check when needed, which was more other than not.
		
Click to expand...

You know Cliff and I both went to UCLA, and he was my room mate. The Rio Theater in the heart of gangland on the corner of Imperial and Western, about a mile from the original BKF School opened by the money we earned at the theater. The last film I ran there was was "AKA Cassius Clay." I was the only one who was a licensed commercial motion picture projectionist.



			Doc, remember the sign you posted on the front door that read "Owned and Operated by the BKF".
		
Click to expand...

That's right, the money I used to open the school was earned collectively by all of us, including my salary as manager/projectionist.



			In conclusion I never said it was Vountria who kicked Tookie, I said that Tookie believed that it was Vountria and when he was almost crying in pain in the lobby area I was there along with Vountria, Steve and others escorting him and the rest out the door.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, I remember he got fired up and left with his tale between his legs.



			It is true, I think it is time we all write our biography.
		
Click to expand...

Well if I did mine, I would need "immunity" and end up in the "Witness Protection Program" for the stuff I know.

[quote
"Over every possessor of knowledge, their is one who is more knowing".
[/quote]
Just memories Brother.

www.kraiguarsmith.com[/QUOTE]_


----------



## Kraiguar

_Fond memories, Sir. ~Peace and God's continued Blessings~_


----------

