# Kenpo... Hard Style or Soft Style?



## Bill Lear (Sep 1, 2003)

Do you think Kenpo is a Hard Style or Soft Style Martial Art System? Why? What do you think?

I personally think it is a happy medium between the two... Containing both hard/linear and soft/circular flowing movements.


----------



## jfarnsworth (Sep 1, 2003)

It depends upon the individual to make what they want of it.:asian:


----------



## Brother John (Sep 1, 2003)

I've always equated the terms "hard and soft" with "external and internal". I don't see why something that is circular can't be hard, and why something linear can't be soft. It has more to do with the nature of the contact than with the path traveled to make that contact. 
Impact= hard.
non-impact= soft.

On the other thread (where Billy originated this line of discussion) someone stated that they thought that Kenpo could be considered a mix of hard and soft because not all of it's power is dependant upon brute strength (as in TKD or Shotokan)... but this doesn't make it soft. It's not how the power is developed... but that POWER is delivered at all that makes it hard... the fact that our art relies on velocity and alignment to develop this power isn't the point.

Impact...wether from a circle or a line= hard.
non-impact... again from a line or a circle= soft.

tis my reasoning...could be flawed....
but I doubt it.
In the end, it's all semantics... and Kenpo aint about words.
Real knuckles meeting real flesh and all that...

Your Brother
John


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Sep 1, 2003)

Kenpo has elements of both....... We should be able to strike Hard enough to be effective and at the same time be flexable or Soft in our ability to maneuver and produce combinations.

No doubt ..... elements of both.

:asian:


----------



## Bill Lear (Sep 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Brother John _
> *I've always equated the terms "hard and soft" with "external and internal". I don't see why something that is circular can't be hard, and why something linear can't be soft. It has more to do with the nature of the contact than with the path traveled to make that contact.
> Impact= hard.
> non-impact= soft.
> ...



Hey brother John,

You have some really good points. I concur. I think that hard vs. soft style has alot to do with the method of generating power for your strikes as well... I still think it is a mix of both based on your defintions stated above though...

Impact= hard.
non-impact= soft.

We do have minor strikes in the system that don't involve a great deal of impact... for instance eye slices.

This is turning into a good thread!


----------



## tshadowchaser (Sep 1, 2003)

I'll concure with whats been said before
I was told (many years ago when I studyed) that it was a blend of both and that the individual instructor made the difference in how it was taught. If he had studied a soft style first he tended to teach a softer system , and the opposit is also true


----------



## Doc (Sep 1, 2003)

An interesting perspective for sure, but the idea of styles being hard or soft is a philosophical one, essentially only applicable to traditional martial arts. This is something Ed Parker came to reject for a variety of reasons but, mostly because his idea of American Kenpo left its traditional roots in the sixties, when he was encouraged to break from the original Yudansahkai he created by his senior Adriano Emperado.

The best definition distinction, is as stated internal versus external, with internal being termed "soft," and external considered "hard." Understanding this is important because the origin of historical arts is philosophically internal or "soft." The "hard" philosophy arrived as a result of significant knowledge not being available as the arts flowed to other cultures. Therefore the inability to create internal energy was supplanted with strength and muscles generating blunt force trauma meeting force with force.

The Kahuna (Ed Parker) went through and evolved through various phases and philosophies. In the beginning he was primarily influnced by the "hard" camp where students "slugged" it out and grappled in classes often ending with the sheding of blood and injuries. This continued until he came to the mainland and ultimately began collaborating with Chinese Masters who exposed him to different perspectives of generatng energy and power over and above the primitive methodologies he was well acquainted with.

As he progressed he came to understand the significance of the internal arts and its impact on him was profound. This is the direction Ed Parker decided was his personal choice and it was during this process that anecdotes like his "Menu of Death" story surfaced, as he began to understand the significant implications of the things he was absorbing.

Thus he went from his "Kenpo Karate" phase to his "Secrets of Chinese Karate" perspective and steadily developed his "internal" skills. But in his decision to expand his art, he recognized from his own training it was impossible to teach "internal arts" without diligent, consistent teaching from a highly competent source to make corrections constantly on a daily basis. That coupled with his desire to focus on self defense allowed that the internal wasn't really necessary if certain conceptual ideas could be explored and implemented by the individual.

So he took elements of his "Kenpo Karate" earlier experience and fused it with conceptual ideas of his "Secrets of Chinese Karate" of his own unique intellectual methodology of  expression and created modern "American Kenpo Karate." A hybrid of of various ideas and philosophies from the old traditional Japanese, Chinese, and American intellectual immediate (comparitively speaking) results perspective. Therefore his "Kenpo Karate" vehicle is hard and soft but not equally so. It is mostly hard, fused with an American perspective, and seasoned lightly with the "soft" Chinese.

How the proportions shake out percentage wise depends on the direction of your study, who taught you, and how long. But don't confuse what you may have learned in the Parker lineage with what Parker himself did. He stayed on the internal path from the day he discovered it, until he passed away, and actually developed a dislike for the old "hard" philosophies of the early days.

Students like myself and Steve Hearring (as well as others) prefer the internal path, while others seem well suited to the hard. Still many more prefer the more expeditious modern mostly hard with soft approach. But even among these there are variations. Some are extremely intellectual in their approach, still others are more "traditional" considering Kenpo as a static vehicle and unchaging from whatever they were taught. No matter what you do, as long as you're happy with it and it works, its still called "Kenpo."


----------



## pknox (Sep 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Bill Lear _
> *Impact= hard.
> non-impact= soft.
> 
> We do have minor strikes in the system that don't involve a great deal of impact... for instance eye slices.*



Bill:

Very interesting!  I haven't heard it described that way before, but I like it.  What would you classify the grappling that is often grafted on to "hard" moves like strikes and traps?  I've always thought of throws and aikijutsu type projections as soft, and joint breaks, pins, and chokes as "hard."  Basically, to me, anytime where you apply more pressure to the opponent than you receive, or strike first, you are using a "hard" technique.  When you react to a strike and use the opponent's energy/force against them, you are reacting in a "soft" manner.  To me, Kenpo, like any good art, has aspects of both.  What makes it so wonderful I believe is the ability to have almost endless options.  If one has the knowledge, they could use a hard or soft technique against almost any attack or situation.


----------



## Michael Billings (Sep 2, 2003)

I think it is a blend.  

e.g. a "soft" parry feeding into a "hard" reverse handsword.  Triggered Salute's initial move, arguably, I consider from the soft side.  Where ever you find purposeful compliance to generate power, can be considered "soft."

Actual mechanics of execution can prevent the technique from falling into this "soft" category.  A case in point would be Triggered Salute, when the body is unyielding and you are rigid when being pushed or striking.  I think, now in retrospect, many techniques can be executed either way, and it is, to some extent, the skill level or tailoring by the individual that determines the Hardness or Softness.

Think also about Forms in a competition.  How many here have chosen to execute them "harder" than we would in the school, when we know we are in front of hard-style judges.  I used to compete a lot, and won by combining hard with soft, and "showing" that to the judges.  I am not sure I would bother now .... nope, I know I would not, but I sure liked that winning feeling and getting the trophies when I was younger.

-MB


----------



## FiveSwords (Sep 2, 2003)

> I think, now in retrospect, many techniques can be executed either way, and it is, to some extent, the skill level or tailoring by the individual that determines the Hardness or Softness.



I agree completely.

I've seen a student who previously studied Aikido perform a Kenpo techinque and be very soft and flowing.  I've also seen a TKD practioner perform the same technique and be very hard and rigid.  So I think a lot of it depends on the person's mindset, but I believe the system was designed to be the best of both worlds.


----------



## pknox (Sep 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by FiveSwords _
> *So I think a lot of it depends on the person's mindset, but I believe the system was designed to be the best of both worlds. *



Exactly!  Like any good art, Kenpo gives anyone with proper training almost endless options.


----------



## Kenpomachine (Sep 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Brother John _
> *I've always equated the terms "hard and soft" with "external and internal". I don't see why something that is circular can't be hard, and why something linear can't be soft. It has more to do with the nature of the contact than with the path traveled to make that contact.
> Impact= hard.
> non-impact= soft. *



Well, I have a friend who does tai chi, and by your definition that would be a hard style and it's not.

If you have to diferenciate, I'll go with the internal/external description, even though I don't know enough of the definitions to speak my mind clearly. But looking at martial arts termed hard of soft by most people is the reason I said hard is sheer strenght and soft is more based in technique (as in proper execution), and that there's both in kenpo.

I like pknox description of hard and soft, but my understanding of what Doc wrote implies some deeper diference between internal and external. Am I wrong, Doc?


----------



## Doc (Sep 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kenpomachine _
> *Well, I have a friend who does tai chi, and by your definition that would be a hard style and it's not. But looking at martial arts termed hard of soft by most people is the reason I said hard is sheer strenght and soft is more based in technique (as in proper execution), and that there's both in kenpo.
> I like pknox description of hard and soft, but my understanding of what Doc wrote implies some deeper diference between internal and external. Am I wrong, Doc? *



No sir you are correct. Movements that are compliant coupled with a hard strike would make all arts a combination of hard and soft. All arts have parries and "giving" movements to set up retaliation "finishing" actions. The distinction lies, as I said before, in the arts philosophy of HOW energy is generated and executed. Because an art has "soft" movements does not make it a "soft" art.

But distinctions vary, depending on the learning stage and student development of some arts. Many arts begin as "hard" and become softer with time and experience. Others never ascend to the soft because the arts philosophy doesn't include it despite some "soft" movements.

Taiji Quan is indeed a "soft" art but strikes very "hard." What makes it a "soft" art is the inherent philosophy of creating "power" and energy from within, through "chi" derived through an understanding of the science of anatomical movement over time. Therefore if "chi" is not philosophically a part of an art, than neither is the "internal" a specific component. 

Although a really complex issue, a good simple example is the Japanese Style student who stacks three bricks and drives his handsword through all three in a powerful motion. Than the Chinese Style student does the same, but strikes the top brick and only the one on the bottom breaks by his intent.

American Kenpo CAN be soft, but for most its more a combination of "hard" and "soft" movement sans the "soft" internal philosophy.

Although it doesn't apply in this string, there ia a neanderthal compulsion by some to simplify what is beyond their understanding but, ......

"Nothing is as simple as it seems, and what it seems is really nothing." -  Ed Parker


----------



## pknox (Sep 2, 2003)

Doc:

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but are you basically saying that "hard" and "soft" are more a function of philosophy then technique?  As you said, many arts have combinations of both in their techniques, and different individuals emphasize different aspects due to their unique attributes and technique vocabulary.  That said, it would then be possible for someone to approach a so-called "hard" system (such as the one often offered as the classical example, Shotokan) with a "soft" philosophy or approach.  The converse would also then be true, which would allow for hard or "street" aikido, for example.  If this is true, than "hard" and "soft" are really labels that would be more fruitfully used to describe _artists_ at various stages of their development, as opposed to _arts_, where the classification would be more one of stereotyping.  If that is what you're saying, it makes perfect sense to me.


----------



## Michael Billings (Sep 2, 2003)

Internal Styles of Kung Fu as v. External Styles:  It is more a matter of energy, and disrupting the same in others, or channeling it correctly in yourself (projecting it.)  We look at the 3 internal styles in China, Tai Chi Chuan Fa being the most widely known, but Pa-Qua (Bagua) and Hsing-I being the other two.  Lots more info on this on the web or in the Chinese Arts on this forum.  

Great concepts, like "Reeling Silk" energy, which I probably erroneously find in Kenpo.  I have done Tai Chi and Pa-Qua, but am definitly a Kenpoist in heart & mind.

It strikes me (pun intended ) that you can have "soft" styles without them necessarily being "internal" styles.

-Michael


----------



## pknox (Sep 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Michael Billings _
> *Internal Styles of Kung Fu as v. External Styles:  It is more a matter of energy, and disrupting the same in others, or channeling it correctly in yourself (projecting it.)  We look at the 3 internal styles in China, Tai Chi Chuan Fa being the most widely known, but Pa-Qua (Bagua) and Hsing-I being the other two.  *



Michael:

Agreed.  TCC and Aikido are basically what comes to my mind when someone says "soft" or "internal."  However, having talked to some TCC folks, I have been told that their art definitely has some external aspects -- usually, however, they are not dealt with until a very advanced level of training, and most people don't go that far.  This is difference is often seen when people start speaking of "martial" Tai Chi.  All Tai Chi is of course by definition martial, but, interestingly enough, when the art begins to incorporate more "external" aspects, the general public is better able to perceive it as plausible in a combat setting.  TCC would be an art that trains first internal than external, as opposed to say classical Shaolin Chuan-Fa (i.e. TCC trains from the "inside out" and Shaolin from the "outside in").  Of course everything is relative, as well -- a TKD stylist would look at Hsing-I and most likely label it internal, where most TCC stylists would say that Hsing-I has a more external approach (at least in the beginning) than their art.

To me it seems "internal" and "external", as well as "hard" and "soft" are points within a continuum, with a lot to be left up to the individual practitioner.


----------



## Kenpomachine (Sep 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Doc _
> *Taiji Quan is indeed a "soft" art but strikes very "hard." What makes it a "soft" art is the inherent philosophy of creating "power" and energy from within, through "chi" derived through an understanding of the science of anatomical movement over time. Therefore if "chi" is not philosophically a part of an art, than neither is the "internal" a specific component.  *



First I must say that when I think of "chi", I do it thinking about energy flowing, but as I haven't studied chinese culture/philosophy, I don't know how well it really describes "chi".

And now, by the above understanding, if you are really into being fit and healthy, there comes a moment in your training when you want to make sure you are maximizing power generation, specially if you only weight 55 Kg and cannot rely only on mass. And that is when one begins studying body mechanichs, power transmission/generation and body axis. 

Would it be easier then to have an internal approach to a martial art regardless of the style if one is petite? Even for someone who hasn't been exposed to internal arts?

Because after all that's been written in this thread, I don't think internal/external match the soft/hard approach. The first being a phillosopical distinction and the second a physical one.


----------



## KenpoDave (Sep 9, 2003)

I think in the beginning, kenpo is mostly hard and external.  As one progresses, so does the kenpo assuming it is being done correctly.

This is not to say that hard/external kenpo does not work.  It must.  But I would imagine that most real martial arts start externally and progress inward, including the "internal arts."


----------



## pete (Sep 10, 2003)

the yin and yang symbol represents the hard and soft within Tai Chi.  we learn to balance the substantial (or hard) within the insubstantial (soft), and insubstantial within the substantial.  Therefore, to say Tai Chi is soft, or hard for that matter, is in direct conflict with a guiding principle.

kenpo also requires a balance of hard and soft to be effective, otherwise it would just be force against force, with the bigger and stronger dominating the smaller and weaker... which is obviously not the case.


----------



## Kempo Guy (Sep 11, 2003)

How exactly do you define external and internal?


----------



## Bill Lear (Sep 11, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kempo Guy _
> *How exactly do you define external and internal? *



What is your definition of external vs. internal or hard style vs. soft style, and what do you think Kenpo is based on your definition?


----------



## Kempo Guy (Sep 11, 2003)

> _Bill Lear asked:_  What is your definition of external vs. internal or hard style vs. soft style, and what do you think Kenpo is based on your definition?



My answer (based on what I've been taught by my Neijia teachers):

I was taught that Internal has nothing to do with whether an art is soft, uses Qi or what not. It has to do with how you manifest your 'jing', i.e. the issuance of whole-body power using proper biomechanics and being in a state of dynamic relaxation. IMA's (internal martial arts) also seek to develop the feel of a "united body" over strength, and uniting your mind and body to direct your "jing". One of the requirements during the issuance of force in IMA is using a unified body. 

External MA then uses sectional power, meaning the body is not united in it's issuance of force. An external artist may strike using a lot of rotational power from the hip which generates a whip like motion to the fist (as an example). While the external practitioner may be relaxed during the strike (until the final moment of impact), the issuance of power differs from the 'whole-body power' used in IMA.

Of course one of the GENERAL differences in characteristics between IMA and EMA imho is the difference in it's application. 
IMA's characteristics are to never issue force until you are in an advantageous position by trying to 'borrow the opponents energy'; sticking and following the incoming force vector; and lastly avoidance of direct contact (never meet power with power).

These principles hold true for most biomechanically efficient styles.
Just some thoughts from the cheapseats...

Also in regards to Qi/Ki, I believe it means 'life force', nothing more nothing less. Hence, without ki we would be unable to live. Everybody/thing has ki some stronger, some weaker. 

KG


----------



## Kempo Guy (Sep 11, 2003)

Addendum to my post above:

I want to make myself a little clearer so theres no confusion. 

An external martial artists may shift his whole body to engage a strike, but often uses compartmentalized power to generate force. When looking at issuing power there are definitely a couple of distinct ways it cam be issued. As discussed there are what I have come to call "sectional" and "whole body" power. When struck, you would very much be able to tell the difference between the two types of force. 

Having a long Karate (Kyokushinkai and Kempo) background I can certainly relate to the 'sectional power' theory. For instance, many Karate and Kung Fu styles will harden their fist (ala iron fist, iron palm training). Now this is never seen in IMA as the focus is never on the striking weapon but on the connection of mind, body and the ground to generate the force. The fist/leg or what not just happens to be there to be used.

As many of you know, different arts have different training methodologies. However, how you issue power is quite congruous between most external styles, the same can be said of internal styles... (since we're using these labels for the sake of this topic). There definitely are commonalities when you break down the biomechanics of each 'branch' (i.e. internal vs. external). 

As I mentioned, I don't like using the labels... but I look at the styles as biomechanically efficient vs. not. BTW, this by no  means mean that one is more effective than another perhaps less efficient? 
Also, another thing I've observed is that most styles that fall within the biomechanically efficient systems (internal) are the focus on teaching principles over techniques, which may be the case of some Kenpo styles. Some of the internal systems may teach forms but most teach sequences of movement (kinetic chains) in order to program your neuromuscular system as opposed to external systems were they use rote memorization of techniques.

And thats all Ive got to say about that. 

Im off my soapbox. Thanks for listening. :asian: 

KG


----------



## Doc (Sep 11, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kempo Guy _
> *Addendum to my post above:
> 
> I want to make myself a little clearer so theres no confusion.
> ...



You should get on the soapbox more often.:asian:


----------



## Kempo Guy (Sep 11, 2003)

Thank you sir. All I am doing is reinterpreting information that I have received from my teachers based on my own experiences and research. 
KG


----------



## Doc (Sep 11, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Kempo Guy _
> *Thank you sir. All I am doing is reinterpreting information that I have received from my teachers based on my own experiences and research.
> KG *


Well Sir, It is obvious you are thinking, and I commend you and your teachers on the subject.


----------



## Michael Billings (Sep 18, 2003)

So, are "rooting" or "grounding" part of your system?  Further, how do you relate your interpretation to American Kenpo?  Tracy Style, EPAK of the 80's and 90's, and the variants we see today, SL-4, George Dillman's pressure points, or Paul Mills' speed strikes knocking someone out with 2 fingers?

Any opinion is welcome.

-MB


----------



## arnisador (Sep 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Michael Billings _
> *Paul Mills' speed strikes knocking someone out with 2 fingers?*



Could someone say more about this (possibly in another thread, if approrpiate)?


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Sep 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _*
> Could someone say more about this (possibly in another thread, if approrpiate)?
> *



NO!  It's our secret....... that is unless you want to become a Kenpoist 

:asian:


----------



## Michael Billings (Sep 18, 2003)

... I think he has a clip of it somewhere out on the web.  Or maybe one of his student's does.  There are some other Kenpo guys who show the same thing, and they have clips out there also.

-MB


----------



## arnisador (Sep 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Goldendragon7 _
> *NO!  It's our secret....... that is unless you want to become a Kenpoist *



Heh. No, I just want to take some of your ideas, I'm afraid--the language and analysis that you all have worked out for me! We know that arnis needs more of this and my instructor has been looking at the Kenpo community as a model.

I've described what kenpoists call "reverse motion" to many people over the years but without having a name for it, and something as simple as picking up that label from this forum and using it has been helpful--"To name is To know," as they say. I was quite serious when I posted about looking for a good intro. to the principles of Kenpo, written for someone who might not know what "Clutching Feathers" meant.

I only want you for your mind *Goldendragon7*!


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Sep 18, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _*
> I only want you for your mind b]Goldendragon7*! [/B]



Damn, and I have been working sooooo hard on my body  ...... well back to the drawing board:rofl: 

:asian: 

Maybe if you are real good........ I'll help you with your request....


----------



## arnisador (Sep 18, 2003)

We really are working on it. Huk Planaas is Mr. Hartman's main Kenpo contact.

Someone directed me to www.akki.com where the fourth video on the Video Clips page has the technique(s).


----------



## Kempo Guy (Sep 19, 2003)

> Mr Billings asked: So, are "rooting" or "grounding" part of your system? Further, how do you relate your interpretation to American Kenpo? Tracy Style, EPAK of the 80's and 90's, and the variants we see today, SL-4, George Dillman's pressure points, or Paul Mills' speed strikes knocking someone out with 2 fingers?



Rooting & grounding I would imagine would be present in just about any martial art, whether the practitioner is aware of it or not. 

As for the PP strikes, they are present in many if not all the techniques if you choose to study them. There are vulnerable points all over your body... Some people focus exclusively on learning the points which I feel is a big mistake. My Neijia teacher used to tell me that "How are 'you' supposed to strike to these points when you can't even defend yourself. You should learn how to defend yourself before you worry about those things". Or something to that effect, and I agree with him.

BTW, I don't think Dillman's PP nor Mr. Mills' two finger knockout has anything to do with roothing or grounding for the most part. Some of these principles may or may not be present during the performance of said technique. 

That KO shown on Paul Mills' website was done with a rather simple technique. You just have to know where to hit.   It requires no strength nor does it require much force.

Here's my theory of what we're seeing... please note that I take no responsibility for anyone's actions if they choose to use what I describe. The information is out there (readily available) for anyone to learn but can be EXTREMELY dangerous and hazardous to your health. Try at your own risk!

FWIW, it looks like it was struck to SI17 as the direction of the force seems to be upwards, which would be appropriate. But, I can't quite see it. It could also be applied to ST9 as it's a very common point to be used for demos.... Not to mention the fact that the cartoid artery is right there and by disrupting the bloodflow will cause a reaction (such as a KO).



KG

"There is no spoon"  - The Matrix


----------



## 8253 (Aug 27, 2004)

I believe that Kenpo has a lot of soft style movements and a few hard style movements.  I think that as far as it being specifically a hard or soft style, it depends on the person who is learning it.  I myself prefer the softness of Kenpo as compared to other MA's offered around the area where i live.


----------



## OC Kid (Aug 27, 2004)

Doc,
You are correct on the evolution of Kempo. I was at Bob Whites school a few months ago and He had a old video tape which he showed to the school. It was of Mr. Parker demo-ing kempo in the 60s. He looked almost like a hard style karate system. I compare that to todays and it is definately different. IMO the Instructor and his philosophy makes the determining factor whether or not a school teaches a "harder" version of the techniques or not. Ive been to some schools that really emphasize the hip ala hard style and others do not.


----------



## Karazenpo (Aug 28, 2004)

Doc said:
			
		

> An interesting perspective for sure, but the idea of styles being hard or soft is a philosophical one, essentially only applicable to traditional martial arts. This is something Ed Parker came to reject for a variety of reasons but, mostly because his idea of American Kenpo left its traditional roots in the sixties, when he was encouraged to break from the original Yudansahkai he created by his senior Adriano Emperado.
> 
> The best definition distinction, is as stated internal versus external, with internal being termed "soft," and external considered "hard." Understanding this is important because the origin of historical arts is philosophically internal or "soft." The "hard" philosophy arrived as a result of significant knowledge not being available as the arts flowed to other cultures. Therefore the inability to create internal energy was supplanted with strength and muscles generating blunt force trauma meeting force with force.
> 
> ...



I have to say, in my opinion, Doc is right on! I don't believe hard and soft have anything to do with being impact and non-impact for all strikes, punches and kicks hit with impact. I was taught, as Doc stated, hard and soft was mean't to be about internal and external with the internal being much more difficult to understand and get down. That being said this is why ALL the Hawaiian-derived Kenpo of that time was initially based on the hard style system. Sometime during and/or little after the 60's most Kenpo/Kempo/Kajukenbo pioneers began to search for the softer, more internal side of the art and incorporated it into their teachings, not just Ed Parker and American Kenpo. I know personally that Professor Nick Cerio took the much 'harder' Karazenpo Go Shinjutsu style that he learned in the early/mid 60's and incorporated more influence from the Chinese martial arts and came up with Nick Cerio's Kenpo in 1974. He took some of the original Karazenpo forms and made them 'softer' and even added a Sil Lum Pai form, Lin Wan Kune.  Gm. Fred Villari did the same thing but saved it for his advanced curriculum right around 1st-2nd degree black belt or with the advent of the form Sho Tung Kwak of which he referred to in the 70's as the first in the series of the 'Chinese' forms, prior to that the system he teaches is essentially hard style Karazenpo Go Shinjutsu. Sijo Adriano Emperado after recieving his initial training in the hard style kenpo karate began incorporating the beginnings of the Chu'an Fa branch in 1959 into his Kajukenbo system which finally came into organization in the mid 60's and in 1969 he incorporated the Tum Pai (internal) branch, not to mention Al Dacascos's perspective of Kajukenbo when he developed the Won Hop Kuen Do branch also in the 60's. I believe also and it goes without saying ALL our original Hawaiian-derived Kenpo/Kempo/Kajukenbo is rooted in the hard style Okinawan arts of that time period, some blended with Danzan Ryu Jui Jitsu. I also feel ALL karate systems, even GoJu (hard/soft) Ryu would be classified as predominately 'hard' systems and I also agree with those who say it's where the emphasis lies. An instructor can emphasize, the hard, the soft, the linear or the circular aspects of any art. It's his/her show! Respectfully, Professor Joe Shuras


----------



## Karazenpo (Aug 28, 2004)

Reflecting on my previous post I have a question also on the proper terminology and application when using hard & soft. I will venture to say then when referring to a martial arts style hard is external and soft is internal. That seems to be the norm. However, it is also used to explain certain Chinese concepts in a different light. For instance, 'Softness overcomes hardness, then hardness attacks softness'-an example being an attacker lunges in at you with a haymaker and you intinctively draw back in some version of let's say a cat stance possibly with a open-hand redirectional type block-this would be the soft movement which defended the attacker's hard attack. Your attacker is now in an off balanced position or soft. You now take advantage and come in 'hard' and counter-attack. If you used a redirectional block or parry, that too would be referred to as a 'soft' block. Open hand strikes are sometimes referred to as soft strikes but how many of us over the years in martial art demontrations smashed through slabs of patio blocks with a palm heel in an attempt to save some wear and tear on our knuckles. However, I still would not call such strikes non-impact for the above obvious reason. They have been referred to as soft strikes but they can still be used with hard power. Using the definition internal/external then even a close fist strike could very well be used as an internal strike, correct? What say you, Doc?  Good topic & good discussion!


----------



## BallistikMike (Nov 15, 2004)

It has always been my understanding that the art develops with the practitioner.

So in our youth 20 - 35 ish you embrace the "hard" aspect of the art you are practicing and then as you cross into the middle age and later years 36 - death  lol you embrace the "soft" aspect of the art you are practicing. Which has always been there. 

What it took was experience, maturity, understanding and many, many, many hours, weeks, years of practice to allow your body and mind to embrace one another and find your true self.

You could also look at it that you have become very good at the art and it looks fluid and soft to those with less experience.

hard/soft its all there always has been.


----------



## Karazenpo (Nov 15, 2004)

BallistikMike said:
			
		

> It has always been my understanding that the art develops with the practitioner.
> 
> So in our youth 20 - 35 ish you embrace the "hard" aspect of the art you are practicing and then as you cross into the middle age and later years 36 - death  lol you embrace the "soft" aspect of the art you are practicing. Which has always been there.
> 
> ...



Imho, You're absolutely correct with your assumption, Mike, because with experience, maturity, understanding and time...........you just make it look easy, lol.


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Nov 15, 2004)

this can be both a difficult or easy question to answer......depending on which school of thought you were introduced to first. IMHO, i think all martial arts when done well are soft. i am staying away from the internal/external designation. 
depending on the route that you were trained in from the beginning will determine whether you act hard or soft. for example, student A studies under teacher A and learns the canon of techniques using the blocks, parries, and strikes. when executed, the tools are used in such a way that uke feels it all, (i hope you're following me) every bone crunching block and strike as it's delivered, until uke is out of commission.
student B learns the canon of techniques from instructor B. when executed, uke doesnt know what has happened until it's too late, tori has manipulated uke into a position advantageous to tori through the use of timing, distance, and manipulative body positioning until the final blow or lock is laid.
sounds kind of esoteric in the description, but it is quite real.
imagine it like turning to walk in one direction and hitting a lamp post with your face.
thats one definition of soft, and thats the way i was taught kempo.

now, is it an internal or external art?

shawn


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Nov 16, 2004)

To start, let me say that the kenpo I spent most of my time in, and have my instructors cert in, is an eclectic Chinese Kenpo-Jujitsu with elements of Hawaiian Kenpo, CKK, AK, TKD, Judo, Japanese Jujutsu, etc...compiled by one of the many folks who started under Tracy/Parker banners, took off on their own to 1) learn from various, complementary sources, then 2) satisfy his own ego by starting his own system. Kinduva a pattern in kempo/kenpo alluded to on another thread, but what-da-hey.

That on the table:

I was taught that kenpo is an inter-expression of hard and soft, containing elements of both that are played out depending on the desired effect (sting, stun, or stop; daze, pummel, maim, or kill).

In it's ideal expression: soft defenses utilizing fluid patterns of checks and parries with evasive bodywork and footwork, ultimately leading to either taking advantage of -- or making -- available targets, which are then struck with "hard-style" blows. Soft defense; hard counters.  

I was also taught that hard and soft are delineated further in the effect of the strike, and the target of the strike. Hard Targets = face, chest, etc. Soft targets = carotid pulse point, groin, styloid process. (how much resisting bone plate is there, compared to available soft-tissues and nerves?). As for the strikes, they get classified by effect. A hard style strike will generate an immediately visible result, the results of which are undeniable and plain to see to all involved. IE, vertical thrust punch to nose causes a "snap" sound from the frail bone, and is followed by profuse bleeding. No matter how pretty/flowery in delivery (or not), "hard" based on the result. 

Soft strikes produce less immediatly identifiable results, frequently not felt until well after the conflict, with deeper results lasting after the conflict. EG: vertical spear hand to carotid artery. Doubtful you'll cause death, arterial dissection, or any of that mythical garbage. What you will do (provided you don't break your fingers) is create an immediate pain that causes the guy to wince, but not stop fighting. After you've ended the fight with follow-up hard strikes or submissions, the poor guy goes home to mind his own beeswax, and ice his fat lip (a hard taret swollen frmo a hard strike) that will be barely noticeable after 3-4 days. The injury site in the neck starts to swell, and the inflammation provides a chemical irritant to the surrounding tissues in the antrior triangle of the neck. These drain to the lymph nodes, which address these metabolites and damaged cells like nivaders, causing infection-like symptoms and a sore throat; everytime the guy swallows for about the next week or two, the injury hurts, the lymph nodes hurt, and he's reminded of how he got this nagging discomfort. Additionally, while the fat lip is immediately resultant, but goes away quickly, the blood released from the anterior cervical soft tissues will take a coulpe days to form a bruise that surfaces to the skin. Just about the time the lip goes down, the neck bruise comes out. Slow to come out; slow to clear up. A visual reminder that lasts for a couple weeks. All the while, tender to the touch, and painful with swallowing.

I think of "sting him" as being some of these soft strikes, possibly to hard targets (to get his attention and warn him of possibilities he may not want to experience); "stun him" as being the punches, hammerfists, etc., to hard targets (PMD/TKO anyone?); and the "stop him" as being hard strikes to soft targets (slam an inward elbow to that spot behind the ear; front thrusting snap kick to the nerves, arteries and veins in the adductor hiatus, etc.). Defensively, a kenpo practitioner should strive for (hard to obtain, but a good target goal) an invincible defence. That's to say, have your system of blocks, parries, checks, jams, stops, etc., so well down, that the guy has to really put himself to task -- and you -- to get off a good, full shot. If he does manage to get one out of the chamber without its progress being stunted, you should still be able to get a partial block, parry, or check in there, such that it barely grazes or taps you. That's the "soft" side of defense.

Just some thoughts.

Dave


----------



## Karazenpo (Nov 16, 2004)

Kembudo-Kai Kempoka said:
			
		

> To start, let me say that the kenpo I spent most of my time in, and have my instructors cert in, is an eclectic Chinese Kenpo-Jujitsu with elements of Hawaiian Kenpo, CKK, AK, TKD, Judo, Japanese Jujutsu, etc...compiled by one of the many folks who started under Tracy/Parker banners, took off on their own to 1) learn from various, complementary sources, then 2) satisfy his own ego by starting his own system. Kinduva a pattern in kempo/kenpo alluded to on another thread, but what-da-hey.
> 
> That on the table:
> 
> ...



Great post, Dave. Very interesting, I like that one!


----------



## The Kai (Nov 16, 2004)

Pretty much a soft style to hurt, check or avoid the attack, a hard style to finisn the event

Todd


----------



## Thunderbolt (Dec 5, 2004)

AK is a chinese art.????


----------



## Kembudo-Kai Kempoka (Dec 7, 2004)

Thunderbolt said:
			
		

> AK is a chinese art.????


American art with japanese and chinese influences.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Feb 4, 2005)

Although he wasn't particularly a Kenpoist I like the statement I heard Bruce Lee make during an interview. He said, "Be like water. Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water." In the beginning my Kenpo only crashed and was hard in execution, and my movements, even the circular ones were absent of flow. This is an interesting conversation, and Dr. Dave :asian: I like your explanation of soft and hard based on targets and results. I have come to understand, thanks to Doc :asian: , that as a practitioner grows in this art they define their Kenpo. For me it is both a hard (crashing) and a soft (flowing) art, however I aspire for my Kenpo to become softer.

As I have become more comfortable, studied, practiced, learned, observed and read my Kenpo has changed and is beginning to become more flowing - softer. I equate some of my softer movements with conscious relaxation and concentrated energy flow. I have been amazed to find how a palm strike done with a hard stiff strike creates a nice thud, but when executed with a soft flowing relaxed movement the strike to the same target has a measurably more devastating effect on my opponent. When I hit it correctly in this soft relaxed manner, I've had my much larger opponent actually be moved by the power I was able to generate. I've found that the times the strikes do not even "feel" to me like they would be effective, because I am sometimes still stuck in a mind set that my execution need be hard and crashing, is often the times my opponent is moved or tells me it was most effective, and I am amazed. I can not make this happen each and every time, but that is the goal - softer, more flowing, execution with a hard, more crashing, end result.

MJ


----------



## Karazenpo (Feb 4, 2005)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Although he wasn't particularly a Kenpoist I like the statement I heard Bruce Lee make during an interview. He said, "Be like water. Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water." In the beginning my Kenpo only crashed and was hard in execution, and my movements, even the circular ones were absent of flow. This is an interesting conversation, and Dr. Dave :asian: I like your explanation of soft and hard based on targets and results. I have come to understand, thanks to Doc :asian: , that as a practitioner grows in this art they define their Kenpo. For me it is both a hard (crashing) and a soft (flowing) art, however I aspire for my Kenpo to become softer.
> 
> As I have become more comfortable, studied, practiced, learned, observed and read my Kenpo has changed and is beginning to become more flowing - softer. I equate some of my softer movements with conscious relaxation and concentrated energy flow. I have been amazed to find how a palm strike done with a hard stiff strike creates a nice thud, but when executed with a soft flowing relaxed movement the strike to the same target has a measurably more devastating effect on my opponent. When I hit it correctly in this soft relaxed manner, I've had my much larger opponent actually be moved by the power I was able to generate. I've found that the times the strikes do not even "feel" to me like they would be effective, because I am sometimes still stuck in a mind set that my execution need be hard and crashing, is often the times my opponent is moved or tells me it was most effective, and I am amazed. I can not make this happen each and every time, but that is the goal - softer, more flowing, execution with a hard, more crashing, end result.
> 
> MJ



Sounds good to me MJ, nice post!


----------



## Karazenpo (Feb 4, 2005)

MJ, thinking more about it, isn't that what the tsusami that recently hit Indonesia and Thailand was all about..........'flowing and then crashing' with maximum devastation.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Feb 4, 2005)

Karazenpo said:
			
		

> MJ, thinking more about it, isn't that what the tsusami that recently hit Indonesia and Thailand was all about..........'flowing and then crashing' with maximum devastation.


Thanks and a big _*yes*_! I really like the connection you make here. :asian: It's funny I watched a special on tsunamis just last night on TLC (LOL) maybe that's part of why I posted this. It was very informative. In one instance the water in an otherwise calm inlet was disrupted by a quick landslide from a surrounding mountain and it created a mega tsunami wall of water that was as tall as a 50 story building. The water flowed together as a wall and then crashed onto shore taking everything that was in its way. The tsunami that hit Indonesia and Thailand was much smaller but the results unfortunately most certainly were devastating. 

MJ :asian:


----------



## Colin_Linz (Feb 4, 2005)

I dont think there is a button to suit my art. I wouldnt say we are half way between the two, but rather we have techniques within the two sets of principles. Our physical syllabus consists of three areas of study, Goho (hard methods), Juho (soft methods), Seiho (healing methods). While these are separated in the syllabus they are designed to work with each other, this principle is what we call Go Ju Ittai, or hard and soft work best when used together.

For clarity what would be the consensus of opinion on the meaning of the middle button. Is it half way between the two, or do you study both aspects?


----------



## still learning (Feb 7, 2005)

Hello, How important is this if your style is known for " Hard or soft style? Internal or external? When you get hit "Hard is better" with an external fist or external kick. Inner power is always needed..do we have a "hard or soft internal power? A relax body will hit you faster and more powerful? 

 I guess it is the way we were taught or learn this "hard/soft" thing will make us all correct in our own way. How you look at it and form your opinion is your right. No mattter what the other guys say....who's to say what is right? It is all base on who we learn this from? I don't think there is a text book were we could go to prove these thoughts of "hard/soft ways and internal and external" ways. 

 The question is "hard style/soft style refering to way of training in our overall art? OK than it is more of a hard style with perry (soft way of blocking) or indirect blocking, in our school, hard hitting/multiple hitting to the body. Take downs can be soft/hard depending on who you are fighting? Sometimes we must use judgement or face jail time? 

 Every martial art uses both? Can we only use one? Is one way better than the other way?......Is this a " hard a question'? ......Aloha


----------



## still learning (Feb 7, 2005)

Hello, How important is this if your style is known for " Hard or soft style? Internal or external? When you get hit "Hard is better" with an external fist or external kick. Inner power is always needed..do we have a "hard or soft internal power? A relax body will hit you faster and more powerful? 

 I guess it is the way we were taught or learn this "hard/soft" thing will make us all correct in our own way. How you look at it and form your opinion is your right. No mattter what the other guys say....who's to say what is right? It is all base on who we learn this from? I don't think there is a text book were we could go to prove these thoughts of "hard/soft ways and internal and external" ways. 

 The question is "hard style/soft style refering to way of training in our overall art? OK than it is more of a hard style with perry (soft way of blocking) or indirect blocking, in our school, hard hitting/multiple hitting to the body. Take downs can be soft/hard depending on who you are fighting? Sometimes we must use judgement or face jail time? 

 Every martial art uses both? Can we only use one? Is one way better than the other way?......Is this a " hard a question'? ......Aloha


----------



## Seabrook (Feb 9, 2005)

EPAK is a combination of soft and hard movements.


----------



## LexTalinis (Feb 10, 2005)

_They way I was taught Kenpo, it is a blend between hard and soft.  I have also branched out and studied Hsing-I and Pa Kua, so it "softened" up my Kenpo a bit more then was already there.  I like the blen of the two philosophies, and I think they work well in conjuntion with each other.

I am aware that their are many who disagree with that, but those indiviuals generally hail from the "softer" internal arts.  In my humble opinion, I tend to think that keeping one's self one dimentional has a "pigeon-hole" effect._


----------



## Kenpobuff (Feb 28, 2005)

I love the discussion on hard and soft.  I agree that at times and with certain techniques EPAK displays hard and soft sides to its art.  With practice and time in the system we can truely tailor it to the art we want it to be and that fits our own style and/or physical limitations.

I don't want to distract from this excellent discussion and perhaps a new thread should be started on my question, but...

My question on this subject is, what the heck do I check on the tournament registration form? (lol)  Seriously, for those starting out (say, below brown belt)who wish to participate in tournaments and have just been learning the basics in technitques and forms what do you suggest they sign up for?

May be I will answer my own question here where forms s1 & l1 show a hard side with basic blocks and strikes and s2 & l2 and even s3 & l3 tend to lean to the combination soft and hard as well as form 4.  So my modified question is, without a catagory just for Kenpo or hard/soft combination in open competitions where would you place them in a tournament?


----------



## donald (Mar 5, 2005)

I agree that EPAK contains elements of both, and that it really depends on how one is taught, and how one leans in practice.


----------



## Drifter (Mar 13, 2005)

EPAK will work as long as the body mechanics are there. Crashing Wings as an example. You can nudge the person over your leg, or you can nail them as hard as possible. It's all about getting the technique down, and then you can vary your power according to how you want to.


----------



## marlon (Jun 30, 2005)

!@$$#^%#^!!! wrote my reply but i guess i took too long and got bounced!!


Typing faster
Imho there seems to be an equation of soft to internalk and hard to external that does not match my understanding.
Internal, barring discussions on 'qi' generation uses body mechanics  and skeletal alignment to generate power and to fight with
External  is impact driven
soft refers to muscles using more circular motion to generate impact
hard refers to muscles and well uses muscles to generaste impact
Kempo/kenpo is soft and hard and definitely external in orientation

an internal stylist usually attacks the skeletal sytem of the opponent using specific skeletal aligmnets to cause misalignment, imbalances in the attacker often the ground and walls join in the fight creating extra impact.  yes they hit also.

an external stylist is hit hard hit fast hit first.  Very impact driven.

I hope this distinction is clear.  My other post was better

I did not mention pressure point strike or sub level four b/c the inclusion of these attacks or the exclusion would not change these different types of fighting

Again my opinion is that kempo/kenpo is external soft and hard.  although the aikijitsu components of Shaolin Kempo begin to touch on the internal but not indepth.  We can take our kempo/kenp where we want to with knowledge and training

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Shaolinmack (Jun 30, 2005)

I have seen realy hard styles and realy soft styles, but the style i sudie seems to be a balanced combonation of soft and hard. some internat work and lots of external energy.. but thats just me.


----------



## Colin_Linz (Jun 30, 2005)

In Shorinji Kempo we have a saying, Go Ju Ittai. Basically this means that hard and soft techniques work best when used together.


----------



## Shaolinmack (Jul 1, 2005)

i like this saying.... cuz it is verry true..


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Jul 1, 2005)

Colin_Linz said:
			
		

> In Shorinji Kempo we have a saying, Go Ju Ittai. Basically this means that hard and soft techniques work best when used together.


colin, would you classify shorinji kempo as an internal martial art?


----------



## Colin_Linz (Jul 1, 2005)

BlackCatBonz said:
			
		

> colin, would you classify shorinji kempo as an internal martial art?


No, I dont think it would be classed as an internal art. It does try to use the power of the attacker rather than fighting against the attacker, this is true for both goho and juho waza, and it does have quite a lot of circular movements. There is even a lot of emphasis on working in harmony with your attacker. I think in the end there would still be too many hard principles within the art for it to be thought as an internal style.


----------



## RichK (Jul 26, 2005)

It is a hard style because my hard head always meets hard fist than hard wall or hard floor.....lol


----------

