IP Techniques: Do We Need Them?

[Flying Crane]

Hey Mike,

Yes, I agree, and thats why I still teach the IP techs. My thing is, that I dont feel that we need an IP for every single attack. I should be able to take 1 punch tech., work it in the IP, and from there, using the basics, be able to adapt and come up with a response for anything else off that 1 tech. Ex: tech is taught as a right step thru. Work it as a cross, work it against a jab and cross, work it against a jab and step thru, and so forth.

I'm not saying to just have 1 punch tech, I'm saying that we dont need "X" number of punch techs to teach us a seperate, set response for various attacks. Did that make sense? LOL. In essance, we have a tech if the attacker is standing with his left forward, and does a step thru right. Another tech if the attacker throws a cross. Another tech is the attacker is standing with his left forward, but the defender is with his right forward, another..... see what I'm saying? When we reach the spontaneous phase, IMO, there isn't time to process hundreds of techs to find the 'right one' when that punch is racing to our head. We just react, using our basics, and the platform the IP taught us.

Of course, we still take our time. Learn the stuff slow, no resistance, pressure, etc. and gradually build up.

yeah, I believe that whatever your curriculum is, you must begin with ideal phase type training. Slow and methodical, get it RIGHT in every way before you start picking up speed and pressure.

Regarding your other points, I think we're slipping into more of a discussion of how many techs to we really need. We've been down that road before and I'm sure you know my feelings on it.

By the way, I believe that if you isolate every tech in Tracys to Godan that involve a punch of some type, there's something like 170.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Hey Mike,

Yes, I agree, and thats why I still teach the IP techs. My thing is, that I dont feel that we need an IP for every single attack. I should be able to take 1 punch tech., work it in the IP, and from there, using the basics, be able to adapt and come up with a response for anything else off that 1 tech. Ex: tech is taught as a right step thru. Work it as a cross, work it against a jab and cross, work it against a jab and step thru, and so forth.

I'm not saying to just have 1 punch tech, I'm saying that we dont need "X" number of punch techs to teach us a seperate, set response for various attacks. Did that make sense? LOL. In essance, we have a tech if the attacker is standing with his left forward, and does a step thru right. Another tech if the attacker throws a cross. Another tech is the attacker is standing with his left forward, but the defender is with his right forward, another..... see what I'm saying? When we reach the spontaneous phase, IMO, there isn't time to process hundreds of techs to find the 'right one' when that punch is racing to our head. We just react, using our basics, and the platform the IP taught us.

Of course, we still take our time. Learn the stuff slow, no resistance, pressure, etc. and gradually build up.

It isn't making sense to me. Each variation of attack is also coupled with variations in position; so, everything is different!!!!! I like to think of attack variations to be a different tense, and is the guy slightly to the right... to left... tall... short... My point is that you don't have to worry about adapting a single tech to various situations. In the end the student should develop a positional recognition, and feel comfortable through practicing the techs and playing with resistance at different points once the ideal is understood.
Sean

 

[Flying Crane]

I dunno. Here's how I see it...

you punch at me with your right fist, I smash your punching arm with a pek chui and damage your arm, then I hit you with something, maybe a chuin chui (straight punch).

You punch at me with your left fist, I smash your punching arm with a pek chui and hit you with a chuin chui.

You give me a left-right combo, I smash with pek, pek, then follow with chuin.

You're taller or shorter than me, or slightly off on an angle instead of right in front, doesn't matter: Pek and then Chuin.

You punch at me from the right side, I still smash you with a pek, follow with a chuin, or maybe a baht gim ("sword-drawing punch").

You punch at me from the left side, I still smash you with a pek, follow with a chuin or maybe a baht gim.

You reach out to grab at my jacket, you guessed it: pek to chuin.

you succeed in grabbing my jacket, pek to chuin.

You try to push me, and again it's pek to chuin

You grab me by the shoulder(s), once again: pek to chuin.

My point is, most of these kinds of things you can deal with very simply with an aggressively destructive defensive technique (which may end the problem all by itself) followed by a finisher. Lots and lots of different attacks, all handled with the same combo: pek-chuin. Variations naturally fall into place depending on positioning, but the basic techs are the same, on solution for many problems.

why get so complicated?

 

[Touch Of Death]

I dunno. Here's how I see it...

you punch at me with your right fist, I smash your punching arm with a pek chui and damage your arm, then I hit you with something, maybe a chuin chui (straight punch).

You punch at me with your left fist, I smash your punching arm with a pek chui and hit you with a chuin chui.

You give me a left-right combo, I smash with pek, pek, then follow with chuin.

You're taller or shorter than me, or slightly off on an angle instead of right in front, doesn't matter: Pek and then Chuin.

You punch at me from the right side, I still smash you with a pek, follow with a chuin, or maybe a baht gim ("sword-drawing punch").

You punch at me from the left side, I still smash you with a pek, follow with a chuin or maybe a baht gim.

You reach out to grab at my jacket, you guessed it: pek to chuin.

you succeed in grabbing my jacket, pek to chuin.

You try to push me, and again it's pek to chuin

You grab me by the shoulder(s), once again: pek to chuin.

My point is, most of these kinds of things you can deal with very simply with an aggressively destructive defensive technique (which may end the problem all by itself) followed by a finisher. Lots and lots of different attacks, all handled with the same combo: pek-chuin. Variations naturally fall into place depending on positioning, but the basic techs are the same, on solution for many problems.

why get so complicated?

I have no idea what you just said. LOL

 

[MJS]

It isn't making sense to me. Each variation of attack is also coupled with variations in position; so, everything is different!!!!! I like to think of attack variations to be a different tense, and is the guy slightly to the right... to left... tall... short... My point is that you don't have to worry about adapting a single tech to various situations. In the end the student should develop a positional recognition, and feel comfortable through practicing the techs and playing with resistance at different points once the ideal is understood.
Sean

http://kenpokarate.com/index.html

Read "50 ways to Sunday"

A technique, like the 2-hand lapel grab (Kimono Grab), requires you to step back with your left foot when the opponent's arms are extended. But when his arms are bent, it's a different technique and you step forward, using different weapons. So "what if" the arms are bent and you can't straighten them as you step back and strike? Simple. You use a different weapon, striking a different target. Your left foot may have to step slightly to the side, or even directly to the right side. Your right upward strike can change to an asp strike, or go between the arms and twist the opponents arms. You might step back with the right foot and use the left hand defense, or any one of a number of variations - 50 Ways to Sunday. Because of the numerous variations, the defenses against a "Two Hand Lapel Grab" became different techniques, depending on the foot movement and hand weapons used, with the three major defenses being the Kimono Grab, Swinging Gate and Striking Asp.

My point....why do we need 3 seperate techniques? I *think* we may be on the same page here, and perhaps its just a misunderstanding on wording. I suppose its how we can look at it. We could say that its 3 seperate techs. We could say that its 3 variations on the same technique. *I* view it as 3 seperate techs., because thats how its taught. You have them listed and taught as seperate techs. as seen above.

Again, my view is instead of making it 3 seperate techs, keep it as 1, with a bunch of variations.

 

[Touch Of Death]

http://kenpokarate.com/index.html

Read "50 ways to Sunday"


My point....why do we need 3 seperate techniques? I *think* we may be on the same page here, and perhaps its just a misunderstanding on wording. I suppose its how we can look at it. We could say that its 3 seperate techs. We could say that its 3 variations on the same technique. *I* view it as 3 seperate techs., because thats how its taught. You have them listed and taught as seperate techs. as seen above.

Again, my view is instead of making it 3 seperate techs, keep it as 1, with a bunch of variations.

I have always contended that it is all Delayed Sword; so, I see what you are saying but the techs from yellow to Blue are distinctly different enough to play around with.
Sean

 

[MJS]

I have no idea what you just said. LOL

I do. What he's saying is that no matter whats being thrown, you're not responding with 10 *different* techs, instead you're responding with the same thing, just applied to different attacks.

I can take a tech such as Attacking Mace, and using the basic platform, with some slight modifications, depending on how the attack is, etc, come up with at lesat 5, if not a few more, different variations. I dont need 5 seperate techs to teach me what to do.

 

[Flying Crane]

I have no idea what you just said. LOL

figured, and now you know how non-kenpoists feel when they read thru the kenpo threads ;-P

Pek chui is a type of punch, it's really kind of a heavy hammerfist done from the torso, not just an elbow-hinge hammerfist. It can be thrown from many angles including verticle, horizontal, and in between, but in a very standard way it is probably most recognizeable striking down. It is extremely useful in smashing down on a punching arm or other weapon that's coming at you, hurts like a major ***** to receive it, could easily damage the punching arm tremendously. Our idea is, if you are stupid enough to stick it out at us, we are gonna destroy it.

Chuin chui is recognizeable as a straight punch.

 

[Flying Crane]

I do. What he's saying is that no matter whats being thrown, you're not responding with 10 *different* techs, instead you're responding with the same thing, just applied to different attacks.

I can take a tech such as Attacking Mace, and using the basic platform, with some slight modifications, depending on how the attack is, etc, come up with at lesat 5, if not a few more, different variations. I dont need 5 seperate techs to teach me what to do.

yes, and it's even simpler than that. It's not a comlicated kenpo-ish type of tech combination with stepping, blocking, evading, and 14 follow-up blitz strikes. It is literally just two types of punches/hand-strikes. Adapted to the circumstances, but the same two punches.

 

[Touch Of Death]

figured, and now you know how non-kenpoists feel when they read thru the kenpo threads ;-P

Pek chui is a type of punch, it's really kind of a heavy hammerfist done from the torso, not just an elbow-hinge hammerfist. It can be thrown from many angles including verticle, horizontal, and in between, but in a very standard way it is probably most recognizeable striking down. It is extremely useful in smashing down on a punching arm or other weapon that's coming at you, hurts like a major ***** to receive it, could easily damage the punching arm tremendously. Our idea is, if you are stupid enough to stick it out at us, we are gonna destroy it.

Chuin chui is recognizeable as a straight punch.

I just hit him with a little Remo. LOL

 

[clfsean]

I dunno. Here's how I see it...

you punch at me with your right fist, I smash your punching arm with a pek chui and damage your arm, then I hit you with something, maybe a chuin chui (straight punch).

You punch at me with your left fist, I smash your punching arm with a pek chui and hit you with a chuin chui.

You give me a left-right combo, I smash with pek, pek, then follow with chuin.

You're taller or shorter than me, or slightly off on an angle instead of right in front, doesn't matter: Pek and then Chuin.

You punch at me from the right side, I still smash you with a pek, follow with a chuin, or maybe a baht gim ("sword-drawing punch").

You punch at me from the left side, I still smash you with a pek, follow with a chuin or maybe a baht gim.

You reach out to grab at my jacket, you guessed it: pek to chuin.

you succeed in grabbing my jacket, pek to chuin.

You try to push me, and again it's pek to chuin

You grab me by the shoulder(s), once again: pek to chuin.

My point is, most of these kinds of things you can deal with very simply with an aggressively destructive defensive technique (which may end the problem all by itself) followed by a finisher. Lots and lots of different attacks, all handled with the same combo: pek-chuin. Variations naturally fall into place depending on positioning, but the basic techs are the same, on solution for many problems.

why get so complicated?

Keep it simple... the way it was meant to be... Gotta love Southern CMA... Gwa (Pek)/Chop (Chuin)/Sao (Kuhp) ...

 

[Flying Crane]

Keep it simple... the way it was meant to be... Gotta love Southern CMA... Gwa (Pek)/Chop (Chuin)/Sao (Kuhp) ...

ayup, and the pau chui and baht gim, holy hell good night! Those are some scary ways to hit someone, there is a very real danger of killing someone outright with some of those.

 

[clfsean]

ayup, and the pau chui and baht gim, holy hell good night! Those are some scary ways to hit someone, there is a very real danger of killing someone outright with some of those.

Yup... we don't use baht gim per se, we have chinji choi which is basically the same thing but done with the thumb forward/palm up & hitting with forearm. Niters... I'll leave a note on your shirt asking for a taxi ride to an ER... :angel:

 

[Flying Crane]

Yup... we don't use baht gim per se, we have chinji choi which is basically the same thing but done with the thumb forward/palm up & hitting with forearm. Niters... I'll leave a note on your shirt asking for a taxi ride to an ER... :angel:

we aim to hit with the thumb side of the fist, palm-up, but the forearm works if you are in tight or are using as a blocking technique instead. Land that on the side of the head at the jaw-hinge, or on a rising path under the chin, snap that head back, probably break the neck and he lands on his head on the concrete. Call the morgue. *shudder*

one of the things I like about it is where it comes from. You are turned sideways with your arm crossed over, he thinks you are smothered with no way to punch. Not so! Out whips that fist from nowhere and it's all over. If it's tight, just make it more verticle than horizontal or angled. Slips right up to the chin.

That angled pek chui that gets you there in the first place is pretty nasty too. We sometimes block with that instead of outright striking the head, and it has a way of sticking to the bad guy's arm and seriously yanking him along the path it follows. Hit him on the side of the head with it and you won't get a chance to do the follow-up.

 

[clfsean]

we aim to hit with the thumb side of the fist, palm-up, but the forearm works if you are in tight or are using as a blocking technique instead. Land that on the side of the head at the jaw-hinge, or on a rising path under the chin, snap that head back, probably break the neck and he lands on his head on the concrete. Call the morgue. *shudder*

one of the things I like about it is where it comes from. You are turned sideways with your arm crossed over, he thinks you are smothered with no way to punch. Not so! Out whips that fist from nowhere and it's all over. If it's tight, just make it more verticle than horizontal or angled. Slips right up to the chin.

That angled pek chui that gets you there in the first place is pretty nasty too. We sometimes block with that instead of outright striking the head, and it has a way of sticking to the bad guy's arm and seriously yanking him along the path it follows. Hit him on the side of the head with it and you won't get a chance to do the follow-up.

Eh color me stupid... I was talking about biu jong coming up from under like you talked about above with the baht gim.

The chinji choi is equivalent to your down angled pek choi. Fist or forearm on that one too. Our pek is almost strictly vertical in delivery & shorter in motion, like you're firing it from your ear as if on the phone. Chinji is about the same, but angled across body, from "X" shoulder to "Y" hip. Our pek is "X" shoulder to "X" hip.

I prefer forearm for almost all of my circular strikes. Those bones are bigger, more dense & not to mention conditioned with lots of saam sing as opposed to the bones in my hands. My hands are good to go, but the forearms are (for me) a better striking tool.

 

[MJS]

yeah, I believe that whatever your curriculum is, you must begin with ideal phase type training. Slow and methodical, get it RIGHT in every way before you start picking up speed and pressure.

Yes sir, I agree with that.

Regarding your other points, I think we're slipping into more of a discussion of how many techs to we really need. We've been down that road before and I'm sure you know my feelings on it.

Yes, now that you mention it, I noticed that. LOL, actually, that isn't where I was looking to take this thread, but somehow while the # of techs isnt the main thrust of the thread, it does play a small part. I say that because while the IPs, IMO, are important to build a base from, I dont think we need 100+ to help us build that base.

By the way, I believe that if you isolate every tech in Tracys to Godan that involve a punch of some type, there's something like 170.

Oh my....

 

[Flying Crane]

Eh color me stupid... I was talking about biu jong coming up from under like you talked about above with the baht gim.

The chinji choi is equivalent to your down angled pek choi. Fist or forearm on that one too. Our pek is almost strictly vertical in delivery & shorter in motion, like you're firing it from your ear as if on the phone. Chinji is about the same, but angled across body, from "X" shoulder to "Y" hip. Our pek is "X" shoulder to "X" hip.

I prefer forearm for almost all of my circular strikes. Those bones are bigger, more dense & not to mention conditioned with lots of saam sing as opposed to the bones in my hands. My hands are good to go, but the forearms are (for me) a better striking tool.

yeah, I know there's some terminology that isn't exactly the same from one system to another, that's OK. We've also got long and short versions of many of the techs. I think the important thing is, those strikes are devastatingly destructive and that's the point. Root in and rotate and the bad guy goes down.

I know what you mean about the forearms. We see it as the fist is at the most extended point and has the most momentum, but the flip side is if your fist doesn't survive the impact it doesn't help much. Select your targets wisely.

 

[Flying Crane]

Yes, now that you mention it, I noticed that. LOL, actually, that isn't where I was looking to take this thread, but somehow while the # of techs isnt the main thrust of the thread, it does play a small part. I say that because while the IPs, IMO, are important to build a base from, I dont think we need 100+ to help us build that base.

I'd say it plays a big part, actually. At some point adding more techs just cannot be adding anything worthwhile and new, and I'd go so far as to say more and more of them become really questionable, actually not good ideas, even downright bad ideas. You end up spread too thin, and a lot of the time is spent practicing bad material.

Oh my....

oh yes.

 

[jks9199]

I found a rather relevant qoute by chance HERE.

Ed Parker on Techniques:

I teach Kenpo, not for the sake of teaching the techniques, but for the principles involved in them. And even then, these principles must be altered to fit the individual.
The reason I give my techniques names is because there are certain sequences associated with these terms. If I told a student tomorrow that I was going to teach him a counter version to a double hand grab, it's not as meaningful as when I say I'm going to teach him ‘Parting Wings.’
You’ve got to know how to vary things. A lot of the techniques I’ve worked with, they’re ideas, they’re not rules. At any given time, any of my moves can change from defense to offense, offense to defense. Martial artists, and Kenpo people especially, become so involved in doing the techniques exactly right in such and such amount of time, that they get caught in a pattern that they can’t break. That’s not what they’re for. Specific moves, specific techniques are based, like the ABC’s in the English language or standard football plays. You have to have a point of reference and from there the combinations are endless and limited only by universal laws, laws that you can’t change.​

​

 

[MJS]

And this little gem from the same link.​

The Ed Parker system of Kenpo has 154 self defense techniques. Each and every one of them work. But what is it that they actually do?

The techniques of Kenpo teach you the principles of motion and how to use these principles to defend yourself. Although the techniques can work out on the street, any street altercation will change moment by moment. Therefore, an effective technique is one that has trained you to adapt to the moment, without relying on any one predetermined sequence. In class you learn techniques in prearranged sequence, similar to learning how to speak a language through practicing sample sentences. However once a language is learned, you no longer depend on sample sentences to have conversations. We simple converse in the language we have learned. The same is true in Kenpo Karate