A kem/npo sytem

[Monadnock]

If I tell you to train yourself to not anticipate and to move in the moment that is mushin. I may not use the term, but it is the same thing.

If I tell you that you should train yourself to be at Condition yellow (Cooper color codes), that is zanshin, ready alertness with no focus.

I've seen this in Tracy's Kenpo and Kajukenbo and JKD and firearms defensive tactics.

Lamont

I think those are fair starts. Not all inclusive of the Japanese versions I would seek in my own system, but concise none the less. How would someone you tell go and "Train themselves" to do this? Is it done during class, or is it an a self-study?

Thanks,

 

[Blindside]

I think those are fair starts. Not all inclusive of the Japanese versions I would seek in my own system, but concise none the less. How would someone you tell go and "Train themselves" to do this? Is it done during class, or is it an a self-study?

Thanks,

Well, most of the interaction is done in class, so it is there where most of the training takes place. For "mushin" we train reaction drills, where the receiver is being trained not to anticipate, that whatever comes you just react to. So we don't train tech lines very often, your job is simply to pick up and counter what is coming. We start slow with the white belts and by upper levels it is pretty well ingrained. That is heavily simplified, but that is what we do.

Zanshin is taught in everything, but sparring is a major tool. Diffuse focus, random attacks from other members of the class, when you are already sparring with another. If we could have a Kato in the class to randomly attack us, we probably would. Outside of class, if members are together, particularly if we are travelling somewhere unfamiliar, I'll sometimes say "don't look around, where is the nearest exit besides the one we came in at, and what does the bartender look like?" That is obviously a very specific example, but it helps train people to be aware. Just some examples.

Lamont

 

[Hand Sword]

O.k. We've gotten alot here. LOL! :asian:

Let's narrow it down a little, question by question.

Starting with something simple. (

) We all agree to have a Kempo/Kenpo system. So, first question: Which one should we go with KeMpo, or KeNpo? Sounds silly a little, but, does make it difference apparently.

Next, I would say what is the focus of our system? This really requires some thought from all of you before answering. We're all aware of the Kemp/npo world now and what goes on so, which way for us? Meaning, Street effective? which would have intense physical, nasty training, and mindsets, probably scaring away most students. Do we design it to be able to fight other systems like BJJ, Or, do we want to get our way out to anyone, and everyone that wants to learn? This would mean "watering down", marketing, etc.. which is seen now, as terrible things overall. To this question, if thinking it through, what is the focus of it? Physical training? Spiritual training? etc..

I think this answering this will adress the rest of what was described, as it is connected, in terms of theories, and apllications of a system, right down to techniques used.

 

[Carol]

O.k. We've gotten alot here. LOL! :asian:

Let's narrow it down a little, question by question.

Starting with something simple. (

) We all agree to have a Kempo/Kenpo system. So, first question: Which one should we go with KeMpo, or KeNpo? Sounds silly a little, but, does make it difference apparently.

Next, I would say what is the focus of our system? This really requires some thought from all of you before answering. We're all aware of the Kemp/npo world now and what goes on so, which way for us? Meaning, Street effective? which would have intense physical, nasty training, and mindsets, probably scaring away most students. Do we design it to be able to fight other systems like BJJ, Or, do we want to get our way out to anyone, and everyone that wants to learn? This would mean "watering down", marketing, etc.. which is seen now, as terrible things overall. To this question, if thinking it through, what is the focus of it? Physical training? Spiritual training? etc..

I think this answering this will adress the rest of what was described, as it is connected, in terms of theories, and apllications of a system, right down to techniques used.

I'm going to go against the grain a little bit.

I don't know if this should be something that is agreed upon. I think choice is better than enforced uniformity.

Different people want to see different things out of their training. Different regions have different demands. Different demographics have different needs and different worries.

Groundwork for example. I don't think that it should be a 100% mandatory requirement for a Kenpo school to train/test in groundwork. Nor do I think groundwork should be forbidden. Nor do I think a groundgame is this all-telling litmus test that provides definitive proof as to whether a Kenpo school sucks or whether it's decent. The same could be said for conditioning, weaponry, and many other aspects of the art.

 

[Hand Sword]

True in our world now. However, We are the Gods that are leaving OUR way or system. So, It's what WE want it to be. Whowever follows as students of our legacy, will be into it and do it, others will go to other styles, as is done now.

So...Back to this first, before other debating.

Originally Posted by Hand Sword
O.k. We've gotten alot here. LOL! :asian:

Let's narrow it down a little, question by question.

Starting with something simple. (

) We all agree to have a Kempo/Kenpo system. So, first question: Which one should we go with KeMpo, or KeNpo? Sounds silly a little, but, does make it difference apparently.

Next, I would say what is the focus of our system? This really requires some thought from all of you before answering. We're all aware of the Kemp/npo world now and what goes on so, which way for us? Meaning, Street effective? which would have intense physical, nasty training, and mindsets, probably scaring away most students. Do we design it to be able to fight other systems like BJJ, Or, do we want to get our way out to anyone, and everyone that wants to learn? This would mean "watering down", marketing, etc.. which is seen now, as terrible things overall. To this question, if thinking it through, what is the focus of it? Physical training? Spiritual training? etc..

I think this answering this will adress the rest of what was described, as it is connected, in terms of theories, and apllications of a system, right down to techniques used.

 

[Danjo]

Kenmpo?

 

[Carol]

Kenmpo?

Sure

 

[Hand Sword]

O.K. everyone.

So far We've got Kenmpo as the name of our system, over Kenpo or Kempo. Is this Cool with everyone else on the committee? If not, chime in.

If so ...
let's now address the next question:

Next, I would say what is the focus of our system? This really requires some thought from all of you before answering. We're all aware of the Kemp/npo world now and what goes on so, which way for us? Meaning, Street effective? which would have intense physical, nasty training, and mindsets, probably scaring away most students. Do we design it to be able to fight other systems like BJJ, Or, do we want to get our way out to anyone, and everyone that wants to learn? This would mean "watering down", marketing, etc.. which is seen now, as terrible things overall. To this question, if thinking it through, what is the focus of it? Physical training? Spiritual training? etc..

I think this answering this will adress the rest of what was described, as it is connected, in terms of theories, and apllications of a system, right down to techniques used.


I have to leave this thread until later on today. I know we have other topics we all want to get into, but, as the creator of this thread, I'm asking all to please follow my outline of questions. PLEASE Keep any debating focussed to these two questions for now. We have to design this piece by piece. We'll get to the meat and potatoes, which will be some good debate later. I promise!

 

[LawDog]

I might re-write my posting later on.

 

[Hand Sword]

That will come later. Those proponents might not even be included, or included with a different emphasis. As I said, It's a later debate. For now I just want to get a name for our sytem, and the focus/intent of it's philosophy. So, Back to the Two questions:

So far We've got Kenmpo as the name of our system, over Kenpo or Kempo. Is this Cool with everyone else on the committee? If not, chime in.

If so ...
let's now address the next question:

Next, I would say what is the focus of our system? This really requires some thought from all of you before answering. We're all aware of the Kemp/npo world now and what goes on so, which way for us? Meaning, Street effective? which would have intense physical, nasty training, and mindsets, probably scaring away most students. Do we design it to be able to fight other systems like BJJ, Or, do we want to get our way out to anyone, and everyone that wants to learn? This would mean "watering down", marketing, etc.. which is seen now, as terrible things overall. To this question, if thinking it through, what is the focus of it? Physical training? Spiritual training? etc..

I think this answering this will adress the rest of what was described, as it is connected, in terms of theories, and apllications of a system, right down to techniques used.


I have to leave this thread until later on today. I know we have other topics we all want to get into, but, as the creator of this thread, I'm asking all to please follow my outline of questions. PLEASE Keep any debating focussed to these two questions for now. We have to design this piece by piece. We'll get to the meat and potatoes, which will be some good debate later. I promise!

 

[DavidCC]

What could it be focused on: self-defense, sport fighting, personal development, fitness. Out of these I think the most important is self-defense. It alone _can_ encompass the others to some extent.

So we should recognize some differences as way to know what that focus might mean.

S.D. is not sport fighting. SD situations are typically short in duration and explosive in intensity. So what type of fitness training prepares best for that? The insane training regimens of professional MMA fighters are far far beyond what we would need. We could train for anaerobic bursts, I'm sure there are more qualified people than me to address this.

Although there are "no rules on the street" there are consequences to your actions. And some students WILL have rules to follow on the street (LEOs). So the system should avoid teaching techniques that bring legal trouble on our students or that rely on excessive unrepairable injury (eye gouges). Teaching a neck break in response to a single-hand push for example might not be the most responsible thing to do.

I think that an important component of Self Defense is the maturity and control of the spirit, so the training should require that kind of development: Intense and constant attention to detail, meditation and the mental "strategy" of fighting, and a high level of physical contact in the training.

 

[DavidCC]

do we want to get our way out to anyone, and everyone that wants to learn? This would mean "watering down", marketing, etc.. which is seen now, as terrible things overall.

Don't dilute the material! Dilute the teaching.


We could have different programs, one aimed at producing a new generation of teachers of the art, and one aimed at teaching people to defend themselves. Same material taught and tested at different levels.

For the elite class, they would be held to a very high standard of excellence: perform 90% correct 90% of the time. They get the full nuances of it all over time. They get the "why" whenever they master a "how". The most rigorous training, longer hours, more time required to make ranks. Some students will want to pursue this level of training but will be unable to fulfill its demands and those people would not be allowed to contune in this program.

For the general program, they might be held to a standard of 75% right 75% of the time. This could still be functional, in that it could save their lives when the worst came to the worst, but they might never pursue their knowledge at a much deeper level. maybe compare an EMT with an MD as a metaphor... (not that EMTs are only 75% successful LOL)

I wouldn't have any barriers (other than the student's commitment and level of effort) to movement between the classes. not that I would let students waffle between the two, but I wouldn't stop anyone from trying to pursue which is right for them.

Even though it often seems that our Western Civilization is nothing but lazy quick-fixers, I think that a message could be successfully marketed that sold the value of the hard work and intensity we would offer, and the value it would add to a student. But it will take time to "prove it" to the market. We would have to not be afraid to turn away students who were not qualified, and make it well known that we do so.

 

[Hand Sword]

What could it be focused on: self-defense, sport fighting, personal development, fitness. Out of these I think the most important is self-defense. It alone _can_ encompass the others to some extent.

I agree with that. I would vote for our system being self defense themed also. Plus, I would agree that gaining a level of confidence definitely affects one's personal development, and fitness (the grueling repetitions will do that). I wouldn't go with sport fighting personally. I would vote for just self defense themed. Sport fighting, IMHO, causes bad habts, and wrong mentality. If our students wanted to do that, I say, go do it on their own.

S.D. is not sport fighting. SD situations are typically short in duration and explosive in intensity. So what type of fitness training prepares best for that? The insane training regimens of professional MMA fighters are far far beyond what we would need. We could train for anaerobic bursts, I'm sure there are more qualified people than me to address this.

I'd agree with this too. I think if we trained the self defense way, that kind of anaroebic burts would be developed. In terms of training it otherwise, I would go with some. I've always agreed with those that say, in the dojo, self defense should be the focus, if you want to train, jog etc.. on your own.

Although there are "no rules on the street" there are consequences to your actions. And some students WILL have rules to follow on the street (LEOs). So the system should avoid teaching techniques that bring legal trouble on our students or that rely on excessive unrepairable injury (eye gouges). Teaching a neck break in response to a single-hand push for example might not be the most responsible thing to do.

I agree with some of this. We have to, and the student has to be responsible. Responses should fit the stimuli, without going overboard. As for those students with rules, doesn't that outside training cover it? I mean, If we have self defense as the focus of the system, can we leave out those really effective techniques, such as eye gouges?

I think that an important component of Self Defense is the maturity and control of the spirit, so the training should require that kind of development: Intense and constant attention to detail, meditation and the mental "strategy" of fighting, and a high level of physical contact in the training.

I agree with this completely. Mind set, and the training of it is a must in my opinion.

 

[Hand Sword]

Don't dilute the material! Dilute the teaching.

Agreed. If that is the choice. The system should never be compromised.

We could have different programs, one aimed at producing a new generation of teachers of the art, and one aimed at teaching people to defend themselves. Same material taught and tested at different levels.

Interesting.

For the elite class, they would be held to a very high standard of excellence: perform 90% correct 90% of the time. They get the full nuances of it all over time. They get the "why" whenever they master a "how". The most rigorous training, longer hours, more time required to make ranks. Some students will want to pursue this level of training but will be unable to fulfill its demands and those people would not be allowed to contune in this program.

I like that!

For the general program, they might be held to a standard of 75% right 75% of the time. This could still be functional, in that it could save their lives when the worst came to the worst, but they might never pursue their knowledge at a much deeper level. maybe compare an EMT with an MD as a metaphor... (not that EMTs are only 75% successful LOL)

O.K.

I wouldn't have any barriers (other than the student's commitment and level of effort) to movement between the classes. not that I would let students waffle between the two, but I wouldn't stop anyone from trying to pursue which is right for them.

Neither would I.

Even though it often seems that our Western Civilization is nothing but lazy quick-fixers, I think that a message could be successfully marketed that sold the value of the hard work and intensity we would offer, and the value it would add to a student. But it will take time to "prove it" to the market. We would have to not be afraid to turn away students who were not qualified, and make it well known that we do so.

Agreed!

 

[Gentle Fist]

Some of you have had some great ideas so far... I would add or subtract the following...

Ground Escapes - Some schools have them, but most lack good legit escapes. After I started Gracie Jiujitsu I realized how weak Kenpo's escapes were.

Throws - End fights quickly. Not enough throwing in Kenpo.

Less Forms - Commercial Schools thrive on teaching students forms. I don't see the need for them, when there is so much more you could be covering. Less than 6 forms total would be fine.

18+ for Black Belts - TKD gets a bad rap and kenpo is starting to follow suit with "kiddie black belts"

Master Rankings - To be a 5th someone should have to be at least 35, 50 for 8th, 60 for 9th, 70 for 10th...... That way you have you time in. It is not a race to 10th Dan!!!

The rest has pretty much already been covered.

 

[marlon]

For the elite class, they would be held to a very high standard of excellence: perform 90% correct 90% of the time. They get the full nuances of it all over time. They get the "why" whenever they master a "how". The most rigorous training, longer hours, more time required to make ranks. Some students will want to pursue this level of training but will be unable to fulfill its demands and those people would not be allowed to contune in this program.


Character would need to be a requirement. There is a long standing history of teachers only showing the full material to select students. I do not think this should be advertised but i think that we are in a real sense morally responsible for what our students do with what we teach them...to a certain extent. Therefore we should select who we give the full system to based on the above mentioned by David but also based on the character of the individual. It also then, i suppose, means that we need to have high standards of conduct for ourselves and teach / encourage a certain standard of conduct and character to the students...especially the younger ones.

Respectfully,
Marlon

 

[marlon]

O.K. everyone.

So far We've got Kenmpo as the name of our system, over Kenpo or Kempo. Is this Cool with everyone else on the committee? If not, chime in.

If so ...
let's now address the next question:

Next, I would say what is the focus of our system? This really requires some thought from all of you before answering. We're all aware of the Kemp/npo world now and what goes on so, which way for us? Meaning, Street effective? which would have intense physical, nasty training, and mindsets, probably scaring away most students. Do we design it to be able to fight other systems like BJJ, Or, do we want to get our way out to anyone, and everyone that wants to learn? This would mean "watering down", marketing, etc.. which is seen now, as terrible things overall. To this question, if thinking it through, what is the focus of it? Physical training? Spiritual training? etc..

I think this answering this will adress the rest of what was described, as it is connected, in terms of theories, and apllications of a system, right down to techniques used.


I have to leave this thread until later on today. I know we have other topics we all want to get into, but, as the creator of this thread, I'm asking all to please follow my outline of questions. PLEASE Keep any debating focussed to these two questions for now. We have to design this piece by piece. We'll get to the meat and potatoes, which will be some good debate later. I promise!

i like a system built for self defense against multiple attackers. mobile multiple striking. thinking

Respectfully,
Marlon

 

[Ray]

For the elite class, they would be held to a very high standard of excellence: perform 90% correct 90% of the time.

90% correct, 90% of the time = an overall 81% success rate.

 

[Carol]

OK for the heckuvit...

A formal education requirement would be added. For a person to be able to execuote a move means the person can...execute a move. It doesn't mean they can teach or run a business well enough to be able to pass on the art. I'd suggest that the skillset of our teachers and school owners gets rounded out....say a minimum of a 2 year degree in a related field required to be a teacher, minimum of 4 year degree (preferably in Business) to be a school owner.

Do away with belt ranks and other distractions and focus on the training. No belt ranks, no belt tests, no belt test fees, no senior instructors, masters, or grandmasters.....just instructor, student, and art.

 

[Blindside]

Character would need to be a requirement. There is a long standing history of teachers only showing the full material to select students. I do not think this should be advertised but i think that we are in a real sense morally responsible for what our students do with what we teach them...to a certain extent. Therefore we should select who we give the full system to based on the above mentioned by David but also based on the character of the individual. It also then, i suppose, means that we need to have high standards of conduct for ourselves and teach / encourage a certain standard of conduct and character to the students...especially the younger ones.

How do you assess "character?"
Particularly in kenpo, we have a very checkered past. If you are claiming "moral responsibility" for what your students do, do you limit teaching the deadly eyegouge to only your most advanced students? I don't think you do AK, but "Dance of Death" a low/mid ranking tech in the curricullum, you basically stomp the guy into a bloody mess when he is on the ground. Do you eliminate that or move it into higher ranks because you are worried about the character of your lower ranked students?

Lamont