Fraud.....

[GAB]

Has turned into a very good thread, Thanks for the information "Dudes".

 

[Karazenpo]

hey prof joe!

i dont want to toe the line of disrespect to anyone that practices or teaches....but a lot of people i have met that teach have never seen any action outside of their dojo(and i am not implying that people should be spoiling for a fight every 10 minutes like a drunken sailor.......some people are just not in the position to use or test their skills in that manner). i dont think that that is a bad thing, simply because a lot of "stuff" is taught through theory by a teacher, even though that teacher may not practice said theory in everyday life. having said that.....as far a MA go, having theoretical knowledge and practical (practical meaning something outside of your normal tippy tap sparring, or grappling in a scientific way) knowledge is an important combination to have in a teacher (IMHO).
on my next train of thought.......i think that some people that have never been in a fight (but practice thoroughly) are also practising good martial skills.
but that doesnt mean i dont think that a good slap in the face is out of the question, every once in a while.

shawn

Hey Shawn, I totally agree with you. We are most definitely on the same page!

 

[Karazenpo]

Ding! Advantage goes to Joe!

Alright, Alan!!!....lol.

 

[The Kai]

What type of sparring do you do??

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Actually, although there were varying degrees of crossover from one evolving method to another, there were at least 5 clear and distinct philosophies and/or styles....

Wow. Great perspective. Thanks Doc.

 

[pete]

in'eresting, 'specially when i compare doc's descriptions vs. what's on my cert... pete.

 

[Karazenpo]

What type of sparring do you do??

I think this question was addressing Shawn's post but here goes anyway. Over the years we have taught and trained in both, point sparring for tournament competition (for those who enjoy tournys) and kickboxing for those who enjoy that aspect of the game. However, it is mandatory at my school that before you go up for black belt, (so it starts around brown but sometimes at green and even earlier), you must don the pads and headgear and go at it. A white belt can go if they wish but it's mandatory for the brown and black levels. I have to be sure that my students have the experience of taking a blow as well as delivering one ( in the old days, you went without the headgear, now obviously, liability reasons, you can't). I always believed that the measure of a person's toughness is not how much they can dish out but how much they can take. Anyone can dish out a beating but not everyone can take one. Grappling (mat work) is also stressed. As a matter of fact, my students participate in a yearly tournament at Gm. S. George Pesare's Kaito Gakko called the 'Best of the Best'. You have to place in all divisions to win or else you get nothing. They are: 1) Boxing (body only) 2) High kicking (head only) 3) Submission grappling (Chokes are allowed) 4) Long stick 5) short stick 6) archery 7) Power knife throwing 8) blade fighting 9) pistol. They really look forward to it every year and do quite well. I think it's really good for them. In my opinion, it symbolizes the 21st century warrior. I've never heard of anyone else having tournaments like that.

 

[Karazenpo]

Great post Doc! That's why "you da man"!!!

 

[The Kai]

Agreed sparring builds the ability to get hit and keep going, there is always time later to check or think about the pain. Been a while since putting on the boxing gloves and going at it!
Todd

 

[rmcrobertson]

First off, Joe, since you ask, I tell my students that they have a choice of informal and formal address. I tell them--in English classes, that is--that I prefer "Robert," but if they're uncomfortable with that, the correct form of address is the formal one, "Dr. Robertson." Not, "Mr., " and not, "Professor," since we don't have that academic rank where I teach, and learning English is in part a matter of learning correct forms of address for the audience you're addressing.

Of course, as an instructor, there's a cloud of pomposity around what one does in the classroom no matter what.

On the mat, my name's "Robert." I don't come from a strictly traditional tradition, that's not the way I was taught, and I guess I feel that if, "Robert," is worthy of respect, titles ain't gonna git it. I can certainly tell you that my own first instructor called Mr. Parker "Ed," because that's how he introduced himself. That was before my time, but I also happen to have had a pretty well known professor--Ed Thompson, author of, "Making of the English Working Class," and about 93 others, Cambridge don, tank crewman in WWII and head of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the whole nine yards, who also intro'd himself as, "Ed." We didn't even know he was a big deal until we saw him on "60 Minutes," telling Kissinger to get stuffed. But he also made it a point to take all his students out for burgers, individually, and talk to them.

We'd be happier, in the martial arts in America, if we followed such an example. (For that matter, there're long traditions in Japan and China of the Shabby Master.) And there'd be less fraud, too.

Then, there's my experience--it's the guys who insist on titles that one has to watch out for. Certainly, in ordinary conversation they have no place. I use mine when I book plane tickets (though worrying about the guy in Row 17, Seat A, who keels over and they come get me..."Uh...anything that would be helpful in Cleanth Brooks?"), on formal occasions, and when I wish to squish the pompous.

One has no trouble with those who have earned, and who on formal occasions display, ranks of various sorts, whether in academia or in martial arts. One simply wonders about the need to display them all the time--and one's experience has been that the truly skilled and credentialled, as mentioned, pretty much skip the rank stuff.

Apologies for the offense, if any; perhaps there's a bit of a bee in the bonnet for some of us, but one suspects that the topic of this thread and the excessive display of titles are linked in the martial arts world, though not in this particular case.

Let me also note that "High Kicking (Head Only)," strikes one as unwise. Such kicks, if one has one's info straight, are associated with most of the deaths in martial arts tournaments overthe last few years--and one would refer you to a good article in "Journal of Asian Martial Arts," a year or so back, which documented a higher concussion rate for teenage girls in sport tae kwon do than for high school footballers.

The latest evidence is that repetitive blows to the head--even those which in the past have seemed innocuous, as in soccer, "heading," are not good.

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Ding! Advantage goes to Robert.

 

[Doc]

Actually, although there were varying degrees of crossover from one evolving method to another, there were at least 5 clear and distinct philosophies and/or styles.

1. "Kenpo Karate"

What Ed Parker was doing when he arrived on the mainland, first as a brown and later as a black belt opening shop in Pasadena around 54. Wrote the book of the same name and published it in 1961. Bought thousands of patches and got "stuck" with them. Teachers like Chuck Sullivan draw from this era.

2. "Chinese Kenpo"

When Ed Parker discovered the vast knowledge available and embraced the Chinese Arts while studying with and under Ark Wong and Huemea Lefiti. Also where he met Jimmy (James Wing) Woo, and Danny Inosanto. Broke with the established "yudansakai." During this period he wrote "Secrets Of Chinese Karate" and published it in 1963. Notice the compressed time frame. People like Frank Trejo's instructor, Steve Hearring still teach this perspective in Pasadena.

3. "American Kenpo"

Began the codification process of his early understandings of Chinese Kenpo into a distinct evolving American interpretation. Dropped all Japanese - Chinese language and non-essential non-American cultural accoutrements. Notice the lack of the word "karate," considered an insult to the Chinese. Some like Dave Hebler draw from the beginnings of this version.

4. "Ed Parkers American Kenpo Karate"

A series of personal issues causes Ed Parker to decide to enter the commercial marketplace and expand in the second half of the sixties. Looking for a method that differed from the kenpo franchises that preceded him that he felt were flawed, he drew upon his many "transfer" black belts from other styles. Stumbling upon "motion" as a base concept, it allowed him to create loose conceptual guidelines for already competent black belts. This further gave him the freedom to travel conducting seminars, belt tests, and selling, while seeing the majority of his "students" two or three times a year and usually once at the IKC. Most of the well known black belts came up under this system. Some better than others. Some spent their own dime and came to see Parker often when he was in town like Dennis Conatser. Some came very late in the eighties and is the reason they are not on the family tree. The rest came after Parker's death. Most of the older seniors rejected it and/or left, and at least one Kenpo master from another style said, "Parker has gone Hollywood." In truth he had. Movies, TV, celeb students, etc. It worked. This was what he was sharing with a few private students in an effort to cash in on the publicity of Larry Tatum's student Jeff Speakman's movie, "Perfect Weapon." He hoped to rekindle a chain of schools that he directly financially controlled. All of his schools and his black belt students had defected years ago. He maintained only one profitable school run by Larry Tatum in the eighties.

5. "Ed Parker's Personal Kenpo"

The ever evolving personal art of Ed Parker that included elements left out of his commercial diversion or off shoot. (nerve meridians, mat work, manipulations, structural integrity, etc) This included all the things that students couldn't duplicate because Parker didn't generally teach it. Here lies all the things that some have discovered is missing from his diversion art that he never wrote about anywhere. "Slap-Check" comes to mind. I gave what he shared with me my own name after he passed based on phrases Parker used to describe it to differeniate between it and other versions of what he taught. However in reality it is the "American Kenpo" Parker was utilizing before he passed away that was still evolving. Others that he may have taught may have other names for it, but to understand it, a person would have had to evolve with Parker into it becuase of a lack of its hard codification.

I had several questions come to me via email from a reader. One of them he/she asks, "Didn't Parker's commercial Kenpo evolve as well?"

The material I call "commercial kenpo" and represented in the Infinite Insight Volumes, was amassed over a 10 year period beginning "around" 1969, and Parker stated so in volume 1. It's only significant evolution was an introduction of weapons forms by Mr. Parker prompted by many students requests, (an actually not what Parker wanted).

The bulk of it was a designed conceptual vehicle based on "motion" that, in reality, could apply to any art. In fact the Infinite Volumes were written as a conceptual guide for all martial artists in general, and commercial kenpo in particular only because the concepts were not new to kenpo. When you consider that Parker created a successful and effective vehicle that proliferated in such a short period of time, it is quite remarkable.

It however contained very little of the aspects of Parker's (or even Chow's) previous work, nor any of his personal applications beyond "motion" theory. And to answer the question, "No, it does not evolve."

The genius of Ed Parker was that unlike other styles, it ALLOWED and ENCOURAGED (by his design) teachers as well as students, collectively and independently, to evolve on a personal level through exploration and tailoring of the base concepts. This the reason some of the concepts contridict each other. Some might embrace certain concepts while others might gravitate to its contridictions. Personal preference dominates.

This created an environment that permitted all teachers and students alike to study at their own personal level of excellence. Some pushed/push the envelope, some just do generally what's in the "manuals," for better or worse, but all are essentially "happy" where they are. That's pure genius in the martial arts world.

But its weakness is it has a built in ceiling of knowledge unless you venture outside of its contraints. It in many ways is what Parker told Bruce to do, except it actually has structure inherently missing from Bruce Lee's truly eclectic personal work. That is why I have often said that commercial kenpo is JKD's bigger, smarter, and better "cousin." JKD is more philosophical, commercial kenpo conceptual, true disciplines are physically principled.

Further, and according to Parker, "It is an entity feeding upon itself." And without "fresh meat" it will degenerate to nothing. In response to several statements on this thread about "street applications and tested experience." Consider that most came into the commercial school because they had a desire to learn to defend themselves on the street because they had no "street experience." Street thugs rarely study any art in depth because of a lack of discipline. It is much easier to acquire a club, knife, firearm, or amass in a group to accomplish their short term goals of immediate domination of a victim.

Ultimately after going from white to black, the "inexperienced student" suddenly becomes the "inexperienced teacher" of others seeking street experience. The blind leading the more blind, or the perverbial "one eyed man in the land of the blind" teacher.

The "fresh meat" Parker spoke of was experienced fighters from other styles and disciplines to teach the concepts, much like what he himself did when he started the motion revolution. But Parker had an edge. He started with guys that could already fight and had real world experience.

How could you lose with a Steve LaBounty, or his student Tom Kelly interpreting his concepts? Scott Loring, Fred Brewster, Tony Sator, Chuck Sullivan, John Henderson, Steve Sanders, Paul Dalton, Dave Hebler, Ralph Castellanos, Danny Inosanto, Tino Tuiolosega, and the list goes on. All of them coming to Parker with a combination of street, and other discipline experiences. If these guys never learned a technique from anybody's manual they could still knock you on your a$$.

Commercial kenpo has been enundated by children at its financial base, supplemented by the non streetwise looking for validation through colored belts bought and sold in the marketplace. And these are the bulk of your "teachers." Never been in the military, or punched in earnest, or been in a life or death struggle for survival. I was "lucky." I grew up "in the hood" and I was a cop. The possibility of life or death struggles are a daily occurrance for many.

But still, "dojo experience" is better than none, and to some, the one eyed man looks pretty "regal."

more

 

[Karazenpo]

First off, Joe, since you ask, I tell my students that they have a choice of informal and formal address. I tell them--in English classes, that is--that I prefer "Robert," but if they're uncomfortable with that, the correct form of address is the formal one, "Dr. Robertson." Not, "Mr., " and not, "Professor," since we don't have that academic rank where I teach, and learning English is in part a matter of learning correct forms of address for the audience you're addressing.

Of course, as an instructor, there's a cloud of pomposity around what one does in the classroom no matter what.

On the mat, my name's "Robert." I don't come from a strictly traditional tradition, that's not the way I was taught, and I guess I feel that if, "Robert," is worthy of respect, titles ain't gonna git it. I can certainly tell you that my own first instructor called Mr. Parker "Ed," because that's how he introduced himself. That was before my time, but I also happen to have had a pretty well known professor--Ed Thompson, author of, "Making of the English Working Class," and about 93 others, Cambridge don, tank crewman in WWII and head of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the whole nine yards, who also intro'd himself as, "Ed." We didn't even know he was a big deal until we saw him on "60 Minutes," telling Kissinger to get stuffed. But he also made it a point to take all his students out for burgers, individually, and talk to them.

We'd be happier, in the martial arts in America, if we followed such an example. (For that matter, there're long traditions in Japan and China of the Shabby Master.) And there'd be less fraud, too.

Then, there's my experience--it's the guys who insist on titles that one has to watch out for. Certainly, in ordinary conversation they have no place. I use mine when I book plane tickets (though worrying about the guy in Row 17, Seat A, who keels over and they come get me..."Uh...anything that would be helpful in Cleanth Brooks?"), on formal occasions, and when I wish to squish the pompous.

One has no trouble with those who have earned, and who on formal occasions display, ranks of various sorts, whether in academia or in martial arts. One simply wonders about the need to display them all the time--and one's experience has been that the truly skilled and credentialled, as mentioned, pretty much skip the rank stuff.

Apologies for the offense, if any; perhaps there's a bit of a bee in the bonnet for some of us, but one suspects that the topic of this thread and the excessive display of titles are linked in the martial arts world, though not in this particular case.

Let me also note that "High Kicking (Head Only)," strikes one as unwise. Such kicks, if one has one's info straight, are associated with most of the deaths in martial arts tournaments overthe last few years--and one would refer you to a good article in "Journal of Asian Martial Arts," a year or so back, which documented a higher concussion rate for teenage girls in sport tae kwon do than for high school footballers.

The latest evidence is that repetitive blows to the head--even those which in the past have seemed innocuous, as in soccer, "heading," are not good.

Hi Robert, Hey, I call it like it is and that was a good response! Alan gives you this round so we'll call it a draw, lol. I actually agree with it, I guess we just had a misunderstanding because I'm on the same page as far as titles go and don't mind my former post, I was just trying to use a little humor to get everyone to lighten up a little and have some fun, no offense intended either.
As far as the kicks to the head go, I know what you mean but those are the rules of game at that tournament but in all fairness they do use really good protective headgear and there's never been a problem yet...knock on wood. Take care, "Dude" Joe, lol.

 

[Karazenpo]

I had several questions come to me via email from a reader. One of them he/she asks, "Didn't Parker's commercial Kenpo evolve as well?"

The material I call "commercial kenpo" and represented in the Infinite Insight Volumes, was amassed over a 10 year period beginning "around" 1969, and Parker stated so in volume 1. It's only significant evolution was an introduction of weapons forms by Mr. Parker prompted by many students requests, (an actually not what Parker wanted).

The bulk of it was a designed conceptual vehicle based on "motion" that, in reality, could apply to any art. In fact the Infinite Volumes were written as a conceptual guide for all martial artists in general, and commercial kenpo in particular only because the concepts were not new to kenpo. When you consider that Parker created a successful and effective vehicle that proliferated in such a short period of time, it is quite remarkable.

It however contained very little of the aspects of Parker's (or even Chow's) previous work, nor any of his personal applications beyond "motion" theory. And to answer the question, "No, it does not evolve."

The genius of Ed Parker was that unlike other styles, it ALLOWED and ENCOURAGED (by his design) teachers as well as students, collectively and independently, to evolve on a personal level through exploration and tailoring of the base concepts. This the reason some of the concepts contridict each other. Some might embrace certain concepts while others might gravitate to its contridictions. Personal preference dominates.

This created an environment that permitted all teachers and students alike to study at their own personal level of excellence. Some pushed/push the envelope, some just do generally what's in the "manuals," for better or worse, but all are essentially "happy" where they are. That's pure genius in the martial arts world.

But its weakness is it has a built in ceiling of knowledge unless you venture outside of its contraints. It in many ways is what Parker told Bruce to do, except it actually has structure inherently missing from Bruce Lee's truly eclectic personal work. That is why I have often said that commercial kenpo is JKD's bigger, smarter, and better "cousin." JKD is more philosophical, commercial kenpo conceptual, true disciplines are physically principled.

Further, and according to Parker, "It is an entity feeding upon itself." And without "fresh meat" it will degenerate to nothing. In response to several statements on this thread about "street applications and tested experience." Consider that most came into the commercial school because they had a desire to learn to defend themselves on the street because they had no "street experience." Street thugs rarely study any art in depth because of a lack of discipline. It is much easier to acquire a club, knife, firearm, or amass in a group to accomplish their short term goals of immediate domination of a victim.

Ultimately after going from white to black, the "inexperienced student" suddenly becomes the "inexperienced teacher" of others seeking street experience. The blind leading the more blind, or the perverbial "one eyed man in the land of the blind" teacher.

The "fresh meat" Parker spoke of was experienced fighters from other styles and disciplines to teach the concepts, much like what he himself did when he started the motion revolution. But Parker had an edge. He started with guys that could already fight and had real world experience.

How could you lose with a Steve LaBounty, or his student Tom Kelly interpreting his concepts? Scott Loring, Fred Brewster, Tony Sator, Chuck Sullivan, John Henderson, Steve Sanders, Paul Dalton, Dave Hebler, Ralph Castellanos, Danny Inosanto, Tino Tuiolosega, and the list goes on. All of them coming to Parker with a combination of street, and other discipline experiences. If these guys never learned a technique from anybody's manual they could still knock you on your a$$.

Commercial kenpo has been enundated by children at its financial base, supplemented by the non streetwise looking for validation through colored belts bought and sold in the marketplace. And these are the bulk of your "teachers." Never been in the military, or punched in earnest, or been in a life or death struggle for survival. I was "lucky." I grew up "in the hood" and I was a cop. The possibility of life or death struggles are a daily occurrance for many.

But still, "dojo experience" is better than none, and to some, the one eyed man looks pretty "regal."

more

Wow Doc, you are most definitely 'da man'! Imho, your last post puts everything in perspective and essentially says it all. I know there's nothing else I can add to it....................Take care my friend & be safe, "Joe"

 

[Doc]

Wow Doc, you are most definitely 'da man'! Imho, your last post puts everything in perspective and essentially says it all. I know there's nothing else I can add to it....................Take care my friend & be safe, "Joe"

I got ya six Joe.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Uh Dude, "No SubLevel Four for you!"

Fine. For at least a couple nights a week, I'll put on the puhjammers. Fixin' to show soon, if you're still up for witnessing the clumsiness of the near-dead.

D.

But I'm keeping "Dude" as my honorrific.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Dude Shuras:

Rock on.

Dave.

 

[BlackCatBonz]

i guess i will reply to the type of sparring question as well......in case it was directed at me.
yes i have done sparring with head gear and pads......but that was never done in the interest of learning self defense nor was it ever used as a training tool so to speak....more for the fun of contest.
the type of training that i was taught and continue to practice is one that tries to keep it as real as possible without someone getting killed or maimed.
that does not mean that i dont run through drills or kata, i believe those are an important part of study......i am talking from a strictly self defense standpoint.
in the past i have learned to protect myself by doing it this way and not through something that too contest like.
no pads....no gloves.....no cups.....no mouth guards.
i have been punched in the throat, in the neck, groin....you name it
kicked in the face, the knee, hit with bokkens, bats, sticks and other assorted hard things.
defended against blades both real and fake....along with practicing handgun disarms with a starter pistol (the object being to remove the pistol without it firing)
i worked in a night club for 5 years.....4 of those as head doorman.
i have had bottles thrown at me, broken and waved in my face, screwdrivers (not the drink) and pocketknives pulled on me, spit on, slapped by a girl (lol), and almost vomited on several times.
i honestly believe if it wasnt for my "realistic" training, i might not be sitting at my computer right now.
i am just a lowly nodan shodan, but i do believe that my experiences have helped me become a better martial artist and teacher.
i have no need to tell someone that i am something greater than i am.......what you see is what you get. i wear a plain old black belt....and i try to get out and train as often as i can with my friends.

shawn

 

[The Kai]

So you spar full contact with out pads on and no target restrictions (like kyokushikai)? Just trying to see how different styles spar.

Todd

 

[GAB]

Hi All,

Regarding the type of contact Shawn is talking about is more like point contact.
IMO.
Not hitting full steam but making contact and getting the point.

It is the essence of contact but not as hard. Some times it gets out of hand and people get hurt.
I guess you can say "only the strong survive" or in the words of Darwin.
Paraphrased here..The replication process is with the stongest of the species to allow that particular species to survive....The mistake is not the best picture.... Extinct comes to mind.
Or the other side of the coin is a mutation that occurs that assists the species.

Nice thread, I am only tossing in a few thoughts.

Regards, Gary