BallistikMike said:
Ok Doc
1. Addressing the Gracies. I am no fan and I know you are not, they did bring to the MA's public an effective ground system for the arena. I say they made enough changes to Judo to call it there own just like any of the founding fathers of Kenpo.
Well sir here I disagree, unless you're willing to give credit to the people who invented the compact laser disc or the vinyl record as well. A system of fighting and a new wrinkle in a sport are not the same thing. One is infinitely more complex and demanding where your life may be on the line, and they other is a controlled environment with severely limited techniques allowed, and an on board monitor to enforce the restrictions under specified time limitations. Frankly to compare What Ed Parker did to what the Gracies did is rather insulting art wise at the least.
Sorry if you are so anti-grappling that you get blinded to the fact that Ed Parker did the exact same thing the Gracies did only 30 years early and with "American Kenpo"
Sir, I am not anti-grappling. In fact one of my good friends is Gene LaBell, and we did a DVD together. It just so happens I don't equate a sporting contest in a controlled environment to the complexity of a street fight. Nor am I "blinded" to any facet of Ed Parker's work. There simply is no comparison unless you wish to do so only as an analogy
2. A description of the "traditional" EPAK. You take the word "traditional" out of context.
No sir, you used the word out of context and applied it liberally to a large segment of people of which many you are not familiar with.
Many and yes Many do strictly adhere to the Vol. 5 outline of what should be taught in order for it to be EPAK as it should. Then people such as yourself who are off the radar and teach a different version of American Kenpo.
Well sir this may come as a surprise to you, but the infinite Insight series volume one was published in 1981, and has my name in it so I am quite familiar with the material. the information in those series of books by Mr. Parker's own description, was an accumulation of material he compiled over a ten year period.
This sir does not come even close to the bulk of the Kenpo knowledge Ed Parker Sr. Possessed, and is only a fraction of the Kenpo that Ed Parker himself utilized. There was Kenpo before that diversion into commercialism existed, and there are significant numbers of individuals who continue along the lines of what they were taught before that material came into being.
To suggest that I am "off the radar" because my personal knowledge and experience apparently pre-dates yours and the Infinite Insight Books, is a rather myopic perspective of the art in general, and speaks significantly of your lack of knowledge. In the circle of martial artists I associate, you would be considered a'off the radar" for such an elementary and limited view of a rich history of development.
My mistake was not using the word "Many" or "Some" or "Others".
No sir, your mistake was simply not being specific and paintng a group of which you do not have full knowledge with a broad brush.
I will now make sure I am politicaly correct in what I type and make sure I have my lawyer check for my mistakes or words that will protect everyone.
Sir, it has nothing to do with political correctness, and your sarcasm is duly noted. This is a medium that requires specificity if we are to communicate effectively. There are no vocal inflections or intonations, in conjunction with eye contact and body language available for interpretation. All there is to go on is what you type, period. if you don't want to be misunderstood, type what you mean and be specific.
Yes Doc I am sure I would have a hard time underdstanding how you teach Kenpo with the curriculum you teach. I am sure the theories and concepts you teach are way over my head as well as the lingo.
Although I don't know you sir, I must disagree again. Clearly there may be things you have not been exposed to that I teach, however I would not characterize them as "over your head." We are all ignorant in some areas simply because none of us are all knowing. Given the opportunity, I'm sure you wouild have no problem understanding the "concepts" or the "lingo" terminology.
3. You proved my point about the JKD crowd. It is a training concept, yet nearly everyone I see in the Mags, in the phone book, on video, at the seminars says "Bruce Lee taught it like this." Well thats wrong, 90% of the people teaching JKD never met Bruce LEE they learned it from others, who learned it from others, who trained with Bruce Lee.
On this we do not disagree. Commercial JKD is a cousin to commercial kenpo.
4. My last statment was not a dig, but something even a child knows. If you believe you can and/or cant do something well you wll believe that.
Accepting the fact that you cannot learn everything there is to learn about a particular subject does not keep you from moving beyond your teacher. It is simply an acknowledgement of the vastness of the information. Doing so is not "giving up" nor limiting yourself. Perhaps its only a matter of choosing what part of the information you wish to tackle. And I don't think any "child" knows that. That sounds like an overly simplistic inappropriate assertion of a complex concept best left to individual interpretation.
But Mr. OBriant can clarify what he means himself, if he desires.
If he had only stayed with Parker just a tad longer. 
artyon:
