Extentions

[Dark Kenpo Lord]

Wrong.

First, Zach is an awesome kenpoist. Don't short his knowlege of Kenpo nor his ability to use it.

Second, he has devised a new way to study kenpo and perhaps to more quickly gain mastery. I have no problems if others don't wish to use counterpoint training, and I'm sure Zach doesn't care. I suspect that if Mr. Parker were here he would at least be intrigued by Counterpoint training.

Third. What is this nonsense about only one way to do a technique and the need to fit everything into the equation formula. I never met Mr. Parker, but in the video tapes I've seen he's never done a technique the same way twice and never "by the book."

Personally, I have no problem with you studying Kenpo the way you do. I am sure that you do it well and that your system works well for you and others. Personally I do find value in the extensions, but I've also found that the counterpoint exercises help people develop sponteneity.

I respect your right to study and teach Kenpo in your own manner. I'm troubled that you show such deep direspect for people who differ from your opinion. Kenpo is bigger than that.

Jeff

1) When did I short his knowledge or abilities in that post?

2) Did he truly devise a new way to study Kenpo? Please explain.

3) When did I say there was only one way to do a technique? You say Mr. Parker never did the same thing twice so he must've been using the equation fomula in order to do that, correct? Mr. Parker WROTE THE BOOK, as such, he understood more than all of us and was never bound by it.

4) You've never met me, there is no way you can know how I can do Kenpo.

5) When I hear or see BS I call BS, and if it sounds disrespectful to you, Oh Well.

DarK LorD

 

[kenpoworks]

I do not always agree with DLK, But I have MAXIMUM respect for the way he fights his corner.
The problem people have with emptying the cup is that for some reason they think they are disregarding what's been learned.
On the contrary you absorb (DRINK) the contents of the cup before refilling it, that knowledge becomes part of your understanding.
You dont "unlearn".
Rich

 

[kenpoworks]

Whoops did i say DLK< i meant DKL.

So sorry.

 

[Dark Kenpo Lord]

I do not always agree with DLK, But I have MAXIMUM respect for the way he fights his corner.
The problem people have with emptying the cup is that for some reason they think they are disregarding what's been learned.
On the contrary you absorb (DRINK) the contents of the cup before refilling it, that knowledge becomes part of your understanding.
You dont "unlearn".
Rich

Good analogy but the problem is people do carry a full cup, slowly ingesting the content. Sometimes the content is too great too absorb at one sitting and takes time though they actively seek more to ingest during periods of drought, hence, if you want more, you must obtain a larger vessel to ingest at your own pace and not drain your cup.

P.S. Don't worry about the intials, it's just a ruse



DarK LorD

 

[rmcrobertson]

There's a fundamental misunderstanding, here, of what terms like, "creativity," and "spontaneity," mean in kenpo.

Here's a couple of things they do NOT mean: a) making up something on the fly that completely differs from what you've learned before; b) going completely outside the kenpo system; c) simply modifying what you've already learned.

The, 'equation formula," really, isn't a serious mathematical formula--it's more like a metaphor for the idea of recombining the bits and pieces that you have available, if you're well-taught; if you prefer, it's like some of the formulae you see in anthropology/sociology/folklore journals, where they're trying to map out the underlying structures from which people, or their societies, or their literatures and arts, generate what appears to be, "new," and "creative," texts of one wort or another.

If you prefer, think of games of poker: the underlying deck's always the same, there are certain rules for what's a meaningful hand, or play, and rules for what's not meaningful. One is creative to the extent that one plays a good hand, understands the rules, bets wisely, has a decent grasp of odds, evaluates opponents well.

It's NOT that you keep introducing new cards out of nowhere (yes, poker can have wild cards, but these are still embedded in the basic deck and the rules for playing hands), or suddenly discover brand new rules. Even weird variations of poker are only variations on the same old basic games.

I think it's a fundamental, serious misunderstanding to call some of the stuff I've seen on these forums, "new," or, "innovative," or creative." It's really just one thing or another that advanced practitioner has figured out--which is, of course, more than fine--but then turned around and started teaching as something new and innovative. Nope; not usually.

Look at the discussion of "Glancing Lance." The Big News about changing the technique, so far as I can see, is simply upgrades within the "original," technique itself. There is one exception to this--an error; a poster says that the tech starts with stepping back to 6:00 in response to a kinfe thrust twoards 6:00, when the basic kenpo wiring says, get off line....and it looks to me as though some of the "changes," which follow are logical outcomes of that starting error. But others are in fact simply minor, perfectly-reasonable, effective variations on the base technique. Which I've seen before. Or blundered into myself.

The flaw in the reasoning, in other words, certainly isn't in claiming that something works when it doesn't. it'll work. And it isn't in claiming that this is, "more effective;" it probably is. The flaw is in claiming that this is now the One Right Way, and in teaching students so that their ability to be "innovative," becomes limited.

I think some folks have it backward. Being rigorous about, "the ideal," isn't what limits you. Being merely, "creative," is what does it--because without the solid ideal, you have no template from which to generate what's new.

 

[Kenpodoc]

1) When did I short his knowledge or abilities in that post?

2) Did he truly devise a new way to study Kenpo? Please explain.

3) When did I say there was only one way to do a technique? You say Mr. Parker never did the same thing twice so he must've been using the equation fomula in order to do that, correct? Mr. Parker WROTE THE BOOK, as such, he understood more than all of us and was never bound by it.

4) You've never met me, there is no way you can know how I can do Kenpo.

5) When I hear or see BS I call BS, and if it sounds disrespectful to you, Oh Well.

DarK LorD

1) When you stated that he did not understand the system.
2)He did devise a useful set of training drills. You don't like them, that's fine, just don't disparage what others find useful.
3)Perhaps I misunderstood you, but it appeared that you disparaged Zachs system of training students to respond spontaneously to changes in an opponents response.
4) Agreed. I assume you are very good but have not had the pleasure of meeting you.
5) Agreed. Thus my response.

Jeff

 

[Kenpodoc]

There's a fundamental misunderstanding, here, of what terms like, "creativity," and "spontaneity," mean in kenpo.

Here's a couple of things they do NOT mean: a) making up something on the fly that completely differs from what you've learned before; b) going completely outside the kenpo system; c) simply modifying what you've already learned.

The, 'equation formula," really, isn't a serious mathematical formula--it's more like a metaphor for the idea of recombining the bits and pieces that you have available, if you're well-taught; if you prefer, it's like some of the formulae you see in anthropology/sociology/folklore journals, where they're trying to map out the underlying structures from which people, or their societies, or their literatures and arts, generate what appears to be, "new," and "creative," texts of one wort or another.

If you prefer, think of games of poker: the underlying deck's always the same, there are certain rules for what's a meaningful hand, or play, and rules for what's not meaningful. One is creative to the extent that one plays a good hand, understands the rules, bets wisely, has a decent grasp of odds, evaluates opponents well.

It's NOT that you keep introducing new cards out of nowhere (yes, poker can have wild cards, but these are still embedded in the basic deck and the rules for playing hands), or suddenly discover brand new rules. Even weird variations of poker are only variations on the same old basic games.

I think it's a fundamental, serious misunderstanding to call some of the stuff I've seen on these forums, "new," or, "innovative," or creative." It's really just one thing or another that advanced practitioner has figured out--which is, of course, more than fine--but then turned around and started teaching as something new and innovative. Nope; not usually.

Look at the discussion of "Glancing Lance." The Big News about changing the technique, so far as I can see, is simply upgrades within the "original," technique itself. There is one exception to this--an error; a poster says that the tech starts with stepping back to 6:00 in response to a kinfe thrust twoards 6:00, when the basic kenpo wiring says, get off line....and it looks to me as though some of the "changes," which follow are logical outcomes of that starting error. But others are in fact simply minor, perfectly-reasonable, effective variations on the base technique. Which I've seen before. Or blundered into myself.

The flaw in the reasoning, in other words, certainly isn't in claiming that something works when it doesn't. it'll work. And it isn't in claiming that this is, "more effective;" it probably is. The flaw is in claiming that this is now the One Right Way, and in teaching students so that their ability to be "innovative," becomes limited.

I think some folks have it backward. Being rigorous about, "the ideal," isn't what limits you. Being merely, "creative," is what does it--because without the solid ideal, you have no template from which to generate what's new.

Agreed (in general). Extensions don't work without solid basics and without solid ideal entries. Counterpoint training in no way changes this. In my experience the extensions add to the ability to express one's self in kenpo. They introduce new movements and new twists on movements. Being merely creative is not what counterpoint training is about. The training is merely one more way to help students to learn how to move spontaneously and not to freeze when confronted by new movement. Fighting is by its own nature messy. The training has recieved approval by Huk Planas, Lee Wedlake, Frank Trejo and others. You don't have to like the drills, but I'm offended when it is suggested that Zach does not know Kenpo because he's looking for ways to help train students to be better.

Jeff

 

[Dark Kenpo Lord]

1) When you stated that he did not understand the system.
2)He did devise a useful set of training drills. You don't like them, that's fine, just don't disparage what others find useful.
3)Perhaps I misunderstood you, but it appeared that you disparaged Zachs system of training students to respond spontaneously to changes in an opponents response.
4) Agreed. I assume you are very good but have not had the pleasure of meeting you.
5) Agreed. Thus my response.

Jeff

1)This is what I said, if Zach fits the paradigm then so be it. I never mentioned his name in my statement, you only interpreted it that way.

I've found the reason people alter the system is because they don't understand it. I can honestly say I've felt the same way about many of the same issues with Kenpo when my knowledge of it was limited (notice the past tense). As I gained more insight I'm starting to see what Mr. Parker saw when he created them, and why he left us with the curriculum outlined in Book 5 of II. Extensions are not fantasy, nor are they designed for a particular technique as many of the extensions are interchangeable.


2) Did he design them or were they already there, or found them someplace like Pekrit tessia whatever or some Kali drills? These sensitivity drills exist in alot of systems, it's the instructors knowledge or lack thereof that determines if the students realize their potential with them.

3) Did I?

4) Probably best if you didn't, you probably wouldn't like me anyhow.

5) There ya go!

DarK LorD

 

[Kenpodoc]

1)This is what I said, if Zach fits the paradigm then so be it. I never mentioned his name in my statement, you only interpreted it that way.

I've found the reason people alter the system is because they don't understand it. I can honestly say I've felt the same way about many of the same issues with Kenpo when my knowledge of it was limited (notice the past tense). As I gained more insight I'm starting to see what Mr. Parker saw when he created them, and why he left us with the curriculum outlined in Book 5 of II. Extensions are not fantasy, nor are they designed for a particular technique as many of the extensions are interchangeable.


2) Did he design them or were they already there, or found them someplace like Pekrit tessia whatever or some Kali drills? These sensitivity drills exist in alot of systems, it's the instructors knowledge or lack thereof that determines if the students realize their potential with them.

3) Did I?

4) Probably best if you didn't, you probably wouldn't like me anyhow.

5) There ya go!

DarK LorD

1)Counterpoint fits the system.
2)It's a training method the information is already in the system.
3)I believe you did, if you didn't mean to just say so.
4)I might not. Can't judge till I meet you. Personally I'm comfortable working with people with strong opinions as long as they can deal with my right to disagree.
5)A point of agreement.

Jeff

 

[kenpoworks]

Ha.Ha. DKL, I think those who want more before they have finished what they have are just
"GREEDY BUGGERS".
Mucho Respecto

 

[kenpoworks]

Getting back to "Extensions", may be some one could help me out.
Extensions are part of "THE" system and I have studied them since the early eighties (and have personally discovered a lot).
But! over the years questioning various "in the know" instructors I have found that the story of their authenticity varies greatly from one teacher to another.

Can anyone point me in the right direction to find a politically or personally unbiased insight into the creation of Extensions.

Please reply publically (on the forum) or personally.

with respect

Rich

 

[Dark Kenpo Lord]

Getting back to "Extensions", may be some one could help me out.
Extensions are part of "THE" system and I have studied them since the early eighties (and have personally discovered a lot).
But! over the years questioning various "in the know" instructors I have found that the story of their authenticity varies greatly from one teacher to another.

Can anyone point me in the right direction to find a politically or personally unbiased insight into the creation of Extensions.

Please reply publically (on the forum) or personally.

with respect

Rich

If you're going off the original extensions, I don't sweat it as Mr. Parker had full say in the creation and implementation into the system. I was told Mr. Parker would put them on the desk of the West LA studio and have the senior instructors go thru them, but that's a biased view. The new ones other orgs. are teaching just don't fit from what I've seen, don't know who created those , I don't think it was Mr. Parker tho.

DarK LorD

 

[kenpoworks]

Thanks,

I have heard a simular tale except, Mr. P., would be "on the couch" with various people performing 3 or 4 "versions of techniques", Then Mr. P would say write up the second version, as a base, but I dunno "its a tale".
Also , maybe this "tale" above refers to basic techniques.
Rich
ps I don't have a problem with extensions, just historically curious.

 

[parkerkarate]

I find nothing wrong with extensions. I find most of them fun to learn. Most of them have a meaning, what it is I am not totally shure about because my brain is totally fried right now because I have been studying for tests for the past few months for college. LOL. But any ways overkill, though in most techniques are the idea, that is not the case in some of the extensions. If that makes any sense. I could be totally wrong though.

 

[MJS]

Reviving this thread.

MJS

 

[Kenpoist]

I probably don't have the experience as many of the participants of this post, but here is my two cents worth.
The extensions are added in to build on our repatoire of movement for any given attack or scenario. As mentioned previously the "what if" scenario and more specifically
1) grafting - when "you" chose to change or alter a technique
2) change up - when "your attacker" forces you to change/alter your attack.
Just because you learn the extension doesn't mean you have to get every strike from the technique on your attacker, but it is there should your first strikes not be effective.

I tend to go along more with DKL philosophy of being a traditionalist. SGM Parker thought of everything (look at category of completion). Many kenpo styles of today don't seem to teach all the "why's" and "how's" of the art and people are getting half of the system. Techniques are being altered because people don't understand them or find it too tough to do them. Extensions are being taught to some at the onset - when they have not yet mastered the basics.

I also don't believe in this tip-tap philosophy of kenpo. Hit them as fast as you can (with no effect or power).

Here is your order of importance:
1) Accuracy
2) Power
3) speed

 

[MJS]

I probably don't have the experience as many of the participants of this post, but here is my two cents worth.
The extensions are added in to build on our repatoire of movement for any given attack or scenario. As mentioned previously the "what if" scenario and more specifically
1) grafting - when "you" chose to change or alter a technique
2) change up - when "your attacker" forces you to change/alter your attack.
Just because you learn the extension doesn't mean you have to get every strike from the technique on your attacker, but it is there should your first strikes not be effective.

I tend to go along more with DKL philosophy of being a traditionalist. SGM Parker thought of everything (look at category of completion). Many kenpo styles of today don't seem to teach all the "why's" and "how's" of the art and people are getting half of the system. Techniques are being altered because people don't understand them or find it too tough to do them. Extensions are being taught to some at the onset - when they have not yet mastered the basics.

I also don't believe in this tip-tap philosophy of kenpo. Hit them as fast as you can (with no effect or power).

Here is your order of importance:
1) Accuracy
2) Power
3) speed

Don't short change yourself on your experience level. Your post was full of very good points!! IMHO, the extensions have their purpose in the art.

Mike

 

[Atlanta-Kenpo]

Though there are somethings that I have disgreed on this board with this one I am split. I do think that one should learn the entire system but where does the information end that Mr Parker approved? There are several sets and forms that were "approved" by Mr Parker for what ever reason were not considered to be a nessary part of the kenpo puzzle (I have no clue why because I was not there and never had the honor to meet the man.) However, ask yourself why are only some of the 1st generation seniors teaching/require certain material.

I have found that the 154 + orange and purple extension are most widely taught, forms though 6. and blocking, finger, 2 man and staff set That being said I think there is useful information in anything that you do and if your instructor requires it I am sure he has his reason. Just be sure that those reason are not to keeo you paying.

Now, I think that anyone who wants to learn more about counter-point should really try to look at it with an open mind and if you have questions give Zach a call. I have had the pleasure to going up to TN and spending an entire weekend with him going over the counter-point system and it is a great training tool. He will quickly make you a believer and he with do it with honesty and class. Quite frankly he is a breath of fresh air and can back everything he teach up.

There are many kenpoist out there who think EPAK is the end all to be all but please remenber there are no superior arts and only superior artist. If you are seriously interested in becoming a complete martial artist you should get experience in other systems and Ed Parker himself did this. I myself do experiement in Kali as well as several submission grappling systems along with EPAK and that just makes me a better martial artist.

Just my opinion.

Best Regards to all.

 

[Dark Kenpo Lord]

Though there are somethings that I have disgreed on this board with this one I am split. I do think that one should learn the entire system but where does the information end that Mr Parker approved? There are several sets and forms that were "approved" by Mr Parker for what ever reason were not considered to be a nessary part of the kenpo puzzle (I have no clue why because I was not there and never had the honor to meet the man.) However, ask yourself why are only some of the 1st generation seniors teaching/require certain material.

I have found that the 154 + orange and purple extension are most widely taught, forms though 6. and blocking, finger, 2 man and staff set That being said I think there is useful information in anything that you do and if your instructor requires it I am sure he has his reason. Just be sure that those reason are not to keeo you paying.

Now, I think that anyone who wants to learn more about counter-point should really try to look at it with an open mind and if you have questions give Zach a call. I have had the pleasure to going up to TN and spending an entire weekend with him going over the counter-point system and it is a great training tool. He will quickly make you a believer and he with do it with honesty and class. Quite frankly he is a breath of fresh air and can back everything he teach up.

There are many kenpoist out there who think EPAK is the end all to be all but please remenber there are no superior arts and only superior artist. If you are seriously interested in becoming a complete martial artist you should get experience in other systems and Ed Parker himself did this. I myself do experiement in Kali as well as several submission grappling systems along with EPAK and that just makes me a better martial artist.

Just my opinion.

Best Regards to all.

Seems to me you bought the hype about Kenpo not being all encompassing hook, line, and sinker. Shame you're paying money for bad instruction in the art of AK. If people tend to think they need to add anything to Kenpo, it's just because they either 1)don't do it well 2) don't understand the nature of Kenpo 3) both 1 & 2.

DarK LorD

 

[Atlanta-Kenpo]

DKL,

Are you stating that only those under Larry Tatum have been taught EPAK correctly?