DISCARD Encounter With Danger et. al.

Originally posted by Kenpo Yahoo
Just for S&G's why don't you list them again



I'd be happy to talk to you about the unrealistic and mostly ineffective weapons techniques. How about the ridiculousness of the 2-man techniques? How about the problems with some of the combination attacks? Or the "hug" attacks?



Groundfighting seems to be the focus because everyday keeps screaming that it's there, but no one is really explaining where it is or how it is used. Mr. Billings is the only person I can think of on your side of the argument that has offered up any semblance of a correlation between EPAK and groundfighting. If you want to get all haughty about it why don't you just list the techniques that can directly translate to the ground? I'm up for conversing much like I did with Mr. Billings in the other thread, but you seem to resort to intellectual cheap-shots when you see things aren't going your way.

I'm willing to discuss if you are, but I still think that someone should list the EPAK techniques that translate to ground defenses. It wouldn't require indepth explanation, if the correlation is that visible then we would all see it right away. Something like this may also end this particular line of posting.

just a thought
Click to expand...

I'm not going to take any cheap shots or claim to have any great wisdom that no one else has. I will however simply state that the greatest problem in my opinion with translating Kenpo to the ground is that all to often the masses are trying to just make a technique work in a horizontal position. All though this does work for a few of the techniques, it is the underlying priciples and concepts of many other techiques that will lead an individual to better understand the realm of ground fighting. It is not difficult, nor is there any great secret to it, but the path is the lesson not the destination.
Some of us just don't talk as much as others! :asian: :asian:
 
i have not been on ma talk for awhile but here it goes. this is a good thread i would like to point out first off. to really appreciate what kenpo has to offer you have to train in the ground arts to really find the link in kenpo with an educated opinion,not just say it's in there. i have trained extensively in the jkd grappling(larry hartsell line) and have done kenpo since 1983 epak style and yes it does have it in there but you need some experience cross training or an instructor with the experience to guide.

later
jay:D :asian:
 
Rmcrobertson:

My comment about sweeps and reversals were in regards to being on the ground not on my feet.

What I find interesting is that as much as we argue about how we will or won't go to the ground, we fail to realize that many of our own techniques are designed to take an opponent to the ground. Heck I was taught as early as white belt to sweep at the end of deflecting hammer, that's a takedown isn't it? So why then is it so hard to imagine that someone might be training to take us to the ground?

Also, my comments about back kicks and shoulder rolls were in reference to the techniques Encounter with Danger and Leap from Danger that were introduced to the discussion of "Holes in kenpo."

Again, It seems that everyone wants to shout at the top of their lungs that kenpo teaches groundwork, yet no one is willing to put it on the line to start listing techniques. If the relationship is so pervasive then it shouldn't be hard to list these ideas and correlations.
 
Again, It seems that everyone wants to shout at the top of their lungs that kenpo teaches groundwork, yet no one is willing to put it on the line to start listing techniques. If the relationship is so pervasive then it shouldn't be hard to list these ideas and correlations.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can list techniques that work on the ground, because they will not be run the same. I think you may find pieces of them that work in ground situations though.

If you allow the art to show you, it will. To get ideas started, take some available ground fighting positions and start to work with them. For instance:

1. Defender on back, opponent standing in front
2. Defender on back, opponent stradling
3. Opponent on back, defender stradling
4. Defender on back, opponent laying across
5. Opponent on back, defender laying across
6. Opponent on back, defender on back (choke)
7. Defender seated, opponent standing behind

These are just a few. You have to consider that the ground is going to be a limiting factor for Depth, (which was Heigth in standing techniques) but the same principles apply. It is principles that will show you the answers, not just more techniques in a book.
 
I'm willing to discuss if you are, but I still think that someone should list the EPAK techniques that translate to ground defenses.
Click to expand...

Imagine you are on your back, attacker is straddling you across the midsection. He is choking you.

Use Tripping Arrow, by grabbing his right elbow with your left and and do a right palm heel to the ear. Clear his left arm with your right returning elbow. Next move, instead of the sweep, use the same motion to scissor by pushing off with your right foot and shooting your left leg under your body. At the same time, palm heel (or inward elbow) to the face and pull down on his right arm with your left hand. This will have you roll over on top of him.

This is very similar to the AKKI technique Rolling Thunder.

Just a thought.

Another.

You are on your back. Attacker laying on top of you in a choke hold where his arms are around your neck and his head is close to yours. Think about using Striking Serpent's head (or for AKKI'ers -- try Crashing Thunder if their head is close but not too close). Then proceed with the Tripping Arrow type roll/reversal to get on top.

Just some thoughts on how kenpo techniques can be used on the ground.

The fact remains that is you don't practice these techniques (or any others for that matter) from these different positions, you will NOT be able to do them at zero time.

Derek
 
I like the explanation for Tripping Arrow. It is similar in exexution to one I do, but actually may "fit" a little better. Will try it tomorrow night.

Oss,
-Michael
 
Back to the original question at hand...I don't think we should discard Encounter with Danger.

Kenpo has many techniques against punches, kicks, charges. You can execute any of these techniques against attempted grabs. If you can make them work great!

Kenpo has many techniques against grabs, holds, and chokes. We would never have to ever use any of these If we are so invulnerable against punches, kicks, and charges.

Encounter with Danger can be a very effective technique to keep somone from striking you or mounting you on the ground. But, just as we have standing grab/choke/lock defenses for when our punch/kick/charge defenses fail, we need to have escape techniques for when Encounter with Danger fails.

Kenpo teaches students to "what-if" and to graft techniques when situations change. Encounter with Danger can fail in several ways:
1) Attackers can block/deflect the kicks and pass your legs to get on top of you.
2) Attackers can catch your legs while you kick and put you in an ankle or leg lock.
3) Turning your back during a cover out is a bad idea. Going onto your stomach to execute the final kicks is a bad idea. If the opponent moves or attacks you are very vulnerable to the attackers stomps or to a rear mount--the most undesirable grappling position.

Encounter with Danger needs to be supplemented with counters to the three failure modes I've mentioned. Students need to know what to do if their legs are passed and the opponent attempts a mount. Students need to know how to escape an ankle or leg lock. Students need to know to avoid going onto their stomachs and how to get an opponent off their back when they are on the ground.

By supplementing Encounter with Danger with additional ground material, Kenpo's ground game can be as multi-faceted as its standup game. Just as we don't assume we can never be grabbed while standing--and we train for it, we must not assume we cannot be grabbed while on the ground--and we must train for it.
 
See, this is what I'm talking about. Here we have 2 excellent examples of techs. on the ground given by OFK and dcence! By giving examples we can look further at how you can apply the techs. on the ground!

Mike
 
Thanks guys. It only took me five months to come up with a decent example. I owe this recent epiphany to the stimulating discussion on this thread.

The question of whether or not to discard Encounter with Danger or not is actually not the best question. The better questions are:
1) are there situations not addressed by the 250 (or Tracy 600 technique) Kenpo curriculums?
2) Do Kenpo training methods adequately prepare students to deal with attackers who fight back during technique execution?

As you may have guessed, I think there are situations not addressed by the Kenpo techniques and extension. We debate the ground-fighting thing endlessly. What about defence/disarm against a rifle at close range? We have knife, club, and gun defenses. The principles of gun and club apply against a rifle but need to be combined into a Kenpo technique. Has anyone done this? The Krav Maga guys have several excellent rifle disarms.

As you may have also guessed, I think that Kenpo training methods are based too much on traditional Asian martial arts methods. While many Kenpoists really bang in Freestyle and Technique-lines, I am not sure how many Kenpoists are training against someone who is trying to stop the execution of their Kenpo technique. For instance, we have all done Technique Lines where an attacker throws a hard fast punch or combination and then stands there while we block and thump on them. How many of us have done technique lines where the attacker throws his combination, tries to block/evade our counter-strikes, and keeps attacking? How many of us have attended seminars or worked with other martial artists and tried to do our kenpo techniques against someone who is trying to do their boxing, wrestling, Judo, or TKD technique?

The question of whether to discard a Kenpo technique is not the question Kenpoists need to address to preserve/improve Kenpo. The question(s) we need to address are how do we ensure Kenpo remains the most effective self-defense system as it was when Mr. Parker was creating and refining it in the mid-late 20th Century?
 
Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka

The question of whether or not to discard Encounter with Danger or not is actually not the best question. The better questions are:
1) are there situations not addressed by the 250 (or Tracy 600 technique) Kenpo curriculums?
2) Do Kenpo training methods adequately prepare students to deal with attackers who fight back during technique execution?
Click to expand...

1-I'm sure that there are many.

2- I would hope so. If you watch the tech. lines though, that is something that you do not see.

As you may have guessed, I think there are situations not addressed by the Kenpo techniques and extension. We debate the ground-fighting thing endlessly. What about defence/disarm against a rifle at close range? We have knife, club, and gun defenses. The principles of gun and club apply against a rifle but need to be combined into a Kenpo technique. Has anyone done this? The Krav Maga guys have several excellent rifle disarms.
Click to expand...

I'm not too impressed with the KM knife work, but there gun disarms seem to be effective.

As you may have also guessed, I think that Kenpo training methods are based too much on traditional Asian martial arts methods. While many Kenpoists really bang in Freestyle and Technique-lines, I am not sure how many Kenpoists are training against someone who is trying to stop the execution of their Kenpo technique. For instance, we have all done Technique Lines where an attacker throws a hard fast punch or combination and then stands there while we block and thump on them. How many of us have done technique lines where the attacker throws his combination, tries to block/evade our counter-strikes, and keeps attacking? How many of us have attended seminars or worked with other martial artists and tried to do our kenpo techniques against someone who is trying to do their boxing, wrestling, Judo, or TKD technique?
Click to expand...

This is were your aliveness comes into play. Matt Thorton (JKD) is really big on this. Sometimes during my BJJ class, we'll take a certain move, and work is slowly to start, and then gradually add more resistance and fight back by the other person. This, IMO, is probably the best way to see if your stuff is going to really work.

Mike
Click to expand...
 
Mike:

I agree that Krav Maga knife work is pretty simplistic. FMA and Kenpo have much more sophisticated knife techniques. I haven't seen any system with as many gun disarms as KM and I haven't seen any others with a rifle disarm.

I agree with you completely on the BJJ training method. If only there was a way to do that safely with Kenpo techniques...

Have you (or anyone else here) read either "Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu Theory and Technique" by Renzo and Royler Gracie or "Mastering Ju Jitsu" by Renzo Gracie? In both of those books, there are about three pages which should really be read by EVERY martial artist regardless of whether they want to grapple or not. Those pages are the ones discussing the "fundamental dilema of martial arts training" The premise is that there are two types of martial arts training methods:
1) The Aiki Jujitsu and Traditional Martial Arts method is to learn a large repertoire of deadly and dangerous techniques. The techniques are so dangerous they must be practiced with control, without actually hitting targets, and/or with a cooperating partner in order to avoid frequent serious injury. The advantage of this training method is that the student learns movements that could quickly and decisively end a fight. The disadvantage is that the student never actually executes the movements properly in a training environment. Examples are eye-strikes, gouges, bone-breaking strikes, throat strikes.
2) The Judo, BJJ and Boxing method is to limit the techniques to those that can be executed full-speed and full-power against a resisting partner. The advantage is that by eliminating dangerous and deadly techniques, the student can spar for much longer periods without injury and can practice their techniques in a much more realistic manner against a fully resisting partner. The disadvantage is that the student does not include those dangerous strikes in their repertoire and may not be prepared to defend against them.

I think this analysis can teach us much about our training and about how we determine what works and what doesn't.
 
I think this will be the third time I've done so in this particular thread, but I would like to thank Mr. Ence and OFK again for their excellent posts.

Since this is starting to look like a dead horse that has been run over with a steamroller I will back off of the ground thing at least for know. I do appreciate all those who were willing to engage in the conversation and share ideas. Maybe someone will start a list, maybe no one will, but hopefully everyone has picked up a few ideas along the way, afterall isn't that what these forums are for?
 
Wouldn't the Kenpoist's technique be even more effective if he practiced it against an opponent who fought back, who didn't stand there like a rag doll?
Click to expand...

I don't want to sound like I'm pushing a product, but Zack Whitson's "Kenpo Counterpoint" video directly addresses this question. I am just starting to work through this material and find it very valuable.

Lamont
 
1) The Aiki Jujitsu and Traditional Martial Arts method is to learn a large repertoire of deadly and dangerous techniques. The techniques are so dangerous they must be practiced with control, without actually hitting targets, and/or with a cooperating partner in order to avoid frequent serious injury. The advantage of this training method is that the student learns movements that could quickly and decisively end a fight. The disadvantage is that the student never actually executes the movements properly in a training environment.
Click to expand...

OFK, you're on track here regarding the cruelness of these techniques but just as in Kenpo there are strikes that you don't actually ever "do" like eye pokes but it doesn't mean they are done improperly.

Aiki Jujutsu was created to protect the palace. It became the training required to win wars. It was not until the -Do forms came about that Ukemi was systematized to allow training partners to escape the throws. You wouldn't design techniqes for people to roll out of if they were truely meant for war. So the training took a special individual, a different approach to the "self-defense" offered in America.


:asian:
 
Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka

Have you (or anyone else here) read either "Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu Theory and Technique" by Renzo and Royler Gracie or "Mastering Ju Jitsu" by Renzo Gracie? In both of those books, there are about three pages which should really be read by EVERY martial artist regardless of whether they want to grapple or not. Those pages are the ones discussing the "fundamental dilema of martial arts training" The premise is that there are two types of martial arts training methods:
1) The Aiki Jujitsu and Traditional Martial Arts method is to learn a large repertoire of deadly and dangerous techniques. The techniques are so dangerous they must be practiced with control, without actually hitting targets, and/or with a cooperating partner in order to avoid frequent serious injury. The advantage of this training method is that the student learns movements that could quickly and decisively end a fight. The disadvantage is that the student never actually executes the movements properly in a training environment. Examples are eye-strikes, gouges, bone-breaking strikes, throat strikes.
2) The Judo, BJJ and Boxing method is to limit the techniques to those that can be executed full-speed and full-power against a resisting partner. The advantage is that by eliminating dangerous and deadly techniques, the student can spar for much longer periods without injury and can practice their techniques in a much more realistic manner against a fully resisting partner. The disadvantage is that the student does not include those dangerous strikes in their repertoire and may not be prepared to defend against them.
Click to expand...

Yes, I have the Mastering JJ book by Renzo. I have yet to finsih the book, but I do recall the above statements.

Mike
Click to expand...
 
This is what I am talking about when I mention that the attacker throws an attack and then stands there. Wouldn't the Kenpoist's technique be even more effective if he practiced it against an opponent who fought back, who didn't stand there like a rag doll?

http://www.akki.com/vegas/september...ideo_5words.htm
Click to expand...

Alright I said I wouldn't post anymore, but that was about groundfighting, this is different.

It's pretty hard to take a single video and make blanket determinations about an entire system. Just like everyone else in kenpo, their are times when we run static technique lines to evaluate a students understanding of a scripted technique or even just to teach a technique sequence. As the student progresses we begin throwing in combination attacks on their techniques like Delayed sword and sword of destruction (I had my orange belts working this last week, we do the tech a little different than most). The key is that once this is taught it becomes fair game. In future technique lines or drills they are expected to be able to pick up the combination if it occurs or simply finish the ideal technique if it does not. This is why the techniques have to be designed to work for both situations and not require split second changes to account for something else. Then later on, students begin to apply "Tap and Trap" drills as well as obstruction removal manuevers.

In the case of Five swords we worked several variations, 1)left- right punch 2)right- left punch 3) Right punch but attacker blocks your outward chop with left hand (several different trapping variations to work from here) 4) attacker begins to cover up at some point in the technique (this calls for obstruction removal or target change i.e. graft a new technique based on desired targets). These are just a few of the ideas that we work at our school, all which were taught at the AKKI camps.

I agree that many kenpo orgs. and schools teach their students how to kill mannequins but to a degree this is necessary if for no other reason than to ingrain an ideal sequence of motion. As the student progresses there should definately be resistance or continued action on the part of the attacker. This is a subject that I'm sure Mr. Mills has been teaching for many years, but it has most certainly been a addressed and continuously developed since the associations inception in '97.
 
Originally posted by Kenpo Yahoo
Alright I said I wouldn't post anymore, but that was about groundfighting, this is different.

It's pretty hard to take a single video and make blanket determinations about an entire system. Just like everyone else in kenpo, their are times when we run static technique lines to evaluate a students understanding of a scripted technique or even just to teach a technique sequence. As the student progresses we begin throwing in combination attacks on their techniques like Delayed sword and sword of destruction (I had my orange belts working this last week, we do the tech a little different than most). The key is that once this is taught it becomes fair game. In future technique lines or drills they are expected to be able to pick up the combination if it occurs or simply finish the ideal technique if it does not. This is why the techniques have to be designed to work for both situations and not require split second changes to account for something else. Then later on, students begin to apply "Tap and Trap" drills as well as obstruction removal manuevers.

In the case of Five swords we worked several variations, 1)left- right punch 2)right- left punch 3) Right punch but attacker blocks your outward chop with left hand (several different trapping variations to work from here) 4) attacker begins to cover up at some point in the technique (this calls for obstruction removal or target change i.e. graft a new technique based on desired targets). These are just a few of the ideas that we work at our school, all which were taught at the AKKI camps.

I agree that many kenpo orgs. and schools teach their students how to kill mannequins but to a degree this is necessary if for no other reason than to ingrain an ideal sequence of motion. As the student progresses there should definately be resistance or continued action on the part of the attacker. This is a subject that I'm sure Mr. Mills has been teaching for many years, but it has most certainly been a addressed and continuously developed since the associations inception in '97.
Click to expand...

You bring up many good points. When I would teach the techs. to my students, I would expalin to them that this is the "ideal" phase. Everything is going to work perfectly. After they begin to progress and have a good understanding of the techs. I would then tell them that THEY now have to expand on the tech. and make it work for them. By putting them in different situations, that they have not yet experienced, it forces them to be creative and come up with something to do. Of course, in 5 swords, its just off of that one punch. We all know how to block, punch and kick, so if the attacker does something different, they should be able to respond properly.

I do see what OFK is talking about though. Its not an attack on Mr. Mills or his brand of Kenpo, its something that is seen everywhere. Looking back at my post about the way I train my BJJ, I think this is something that needs to be done with the Kenpo. Just a thought.

Mike
 
My point about the AKKI Five Swords video is that all the Kenpo technique videos I've found are like this. Attcker throws a poor excuse for an attack, defender slaps him in the chest a few times while attacker stands there like a zombie, then defender covers out into a neutral bow while attacker stands there unhurt or fakes a TKO/KO.

Does anyone consider this particular clip a good example of Kenpo or is it a bad example? (In my Kenpo school, this would be a bad example).

Where is the Kenpo realism? Has anyone captured on video and posted it onto the web? I'd love to see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

In motion, there is often motion that is overlooked.........

Previous Thread

Question about signatures

Next Thread

Similar threads

K
Encounter with Danger
Replies
19
Views
3K
Goldendragon7
Goldendragon7
T
Throws/take downs of Judo
Replies
7
Views
2K
MJS
M
K
Holes in kenpo
3 4 5
Replies
87
Views
10K
teej
T
A
Kenpo Weapons Techniques
2
Replies
25
Views
12K
Emilewralp
E
Kenpojujitsu3
When my Son was 2....
Replies
4
Views
1K
Doc
Doc

Latest Discussions

Back
Top