Okay, I'll give you that one. Probably a poor choice of words, but I think my point is clear.
Be safe
James
IP Techniques: Do We Need Them?
- Thread starter MJS
- Start date
Okay, I'll give you that one. Probably a poor choice of words, but I think my point is clear.
Be safe
James
ATACX GYM
2nd Black Belt
Yes I think your point is clear,man.I too do spontaneous drills and whatnot,and I believe that I'm the only one onsite that has put it on video and shared it (should be up on my Channel in the next week or two,and there're instances of isolated sparring where I show a technique and spar with it already up on my Youtube Channel).I've been doing them for years,and I posted writeups wherein I specifically refer to them.Idk if they're onsite,but they're definitely either here or on KenpoTalk.com.
I think that Doc or somebody mentioned that GGMEP was considering katas or some form of training regarding firearms.I know Doc mentioned that GGMEP was still developing Kenpo,adding deleting and altering at a very late time in his life (and maybe all the way until his untimely passing).I think very much that we should do the same,and that American Kenpo has PLENTY of space...in fact,IS DESIGNED...to encapsulate and manifest whatever we want to put in it.Doc is a long time trainer of police,former or current Sheriff,knows his way around the pistol and I bet he's used his Kenpo during the line of duty too.He and others here would be good sources to refer to regarding American Kenpo--which is DIFFERENT than ED PARKER'S American Kenpo--and firearms.
I do a variant of EPAK which is the root of my ATACX GYM system (we include a host of other arts and a very very yoga and athletics oriented program) and we ENERGETICALLY address firearms,knives,sticks,bats,chains,bottles,swords (sword attacks are way more common in California than you might think,and they're growing in popularity in other states apparently) as well as a lesser emphasis on the vast array of more traditional African Phillipino Indian European and Oriental weapons.
Points taken James.
Let me ask your thoughts on this, since you mentioned editing things. What do you think of Paul Mills and Jeff Speakman, two men, who, IMO, are respected Kenpoists, in their own rights, and who've both made, IMO, substantial changes to the system. On a side note, I've spent quite a few years in the art myself, and I do enjoy it, otherwise, I'd have stopped long ago. But, I think in some cases, it seems, to me anyways, that some things could follow the KISS principle, a bit more.
True, and thats one of the reasons I cross train. OTOH, its interesting, because there're many people out there, who say that you dont need to look outside of Kenpo, that all of the answers are there. I'll usually disagree with that, but again, thats just me.
Agreed.
Likewise James.
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
Hi Ras,
I'm gonna give you a bit of friendly advice: Take a look at the bottom of your keyboard. There is an extra long key there, called the "space bar". It is your friend, please get acquainted with it.
After every punctuation ending a sentence, things like periods, exclamation marks, question marks, hit the space bar twice. After every punctuation within a sentence, things like commas and semi-colons, hit the space bar once. It makes a huge difference and makes it a whole lot easier to read what you write and you might start getting more quality responses to your posts.
Maybe take a look at lengthy paragraphs and see if you might break them up into smaller paragraphs.
Otherwise it is just really really difficult to read the things you write, especially when it's in a lengthy paragraph like the one above.
thanks, and no insult intended.
Points taken James.
On a side note, I've spent quite a few years in the art myself, and I do enjoy it, otherwise, I'd have stopped long ago. But, I think in some cases, it seems, to me anyways, that some things could follow the KISS principle, a bit more.
True, and thats one of the reasons I cross train. OTOH, its interesting, because there're many people out there, who say that you dont need to look outside of Kenpo, that all of the answers are there. I'll usually disagree with that, but again, thats just me.
Agreed.
Likewise James.
I have never met either Mr. Speakman nor Mr. Mills, but I have seen them in some video clips and heard a lot about them. We are clearly talking about two very accomplished kenpoists who trained directly under Mr. Parker. The two of them, without question, have, what is discussed in another thread, a true "understanding" of the art (which I feel can be relative to each individual) as taught to them by Mr. Parker himself.
Both of the men you reference have amazing skill and teaching ability. If you were to study their teachings independently, I think you would find that both of them are consistent in teaching the underlying principles of EPAK. They have made it their own, but it is not so different from what Mr. Parker taught.
It is well documented that the accumulative journal was created so that the "Ed Parker" schools would have a consistent curriculum to follow so that you could train at any given school and not be lost. The terminology would be the same, the principles would be the same, the school rules would be the same, etc.
Since Mr. Parker is not with us anymore to implement his own changes (which I strongly believe would be the case), We must rely, as they do in nearly every other art, on the definition of our "elders" perspectives on what they were taught and trust that they know what the heck they are talking about.
Are they teaching the EPAK system...? No, but I believe that they are teaching from the base concepts and what they know of what they were taught and that it is EPAK, just not the system as Mr. Parker put on paper.
I think we are foolish to not listen to what each and every one of these first and second generation guys have to teach as they are our living resource into the mind of the late great Mr. Parker whom I did have the opportunity of training with, albeit as a kid, on a couple occasions. He was an amazing mind.
As far as not looking outside of Kenpo? I think we are foolish there again if we don't. EPAK is a system built upon aspects of other arts. Mr. Parker himself wanted the art to be tailored to each individual. I think that this means as far as ones physical makeup goes as well as to each persons experiences (life on the street or other martial arts). I think it is our duty to both preserve what Mr. Parker taught as well as to continue the evolution of this beautiful and effective art.
Hope I answered your questions. I tend to ramble a bit.
God bless and stay safe,
James
Doc
Senior Master
Taken from my current thread on KenpoTalk.
http://www.kenpotalk.com/forum/showthread.php?12596-Misc-FAQ-Ramblings-amp-Stuff
Misc FAQ: Ramblings & Stuff
Ideals, What ifs and other ramblings
What if? Consider these sirs; a well designed default scenario, (ideal), should already consider these things. In my teaching, this is a given. Every technique scenario I teach, regardless of level, has a base realism component of canceling additional aggression. Not just on the initial assault, but throughout the sequence through to its conclusion.
In my view (supported by Parker), and the way I was taught by Mr. Parker, that is what the meaning of "ideal" is. The problem has always been since the launch into the "commercial era" of Kenpo, a misunderstanding of the function of the "manuals" and "Big Red" as guidelines, not instructional materials.
They were never designed to "stand alone" as instructional materials. As I've stated before, the only way Mr. Parker could proliferate his commercial product was to take black belts from other styles, and allowed them to teach his concepts. These black belts were to utilize the conceptual information as a starting point, and formulate their own product from it.
There is nothing in those technique manuals, that provides a definitive solution to any assault scenario, and they were never meant to be. They were in fact created to give a reasonably intelligent teacher, a LOOSE, BROAD starting point to begin their own process of formulating technique scenarios for their own teaching. This was for their down-line in a school or organization, to provide particular consistency for a group that worked together, with a broad general consistency to the overall art.
Once you stepped out of the lineage, school, or organization, there was NEVER an expectation of anything being the same with the commercial product. When Mr. Parker was alive, it essentially functioned as intended because only he could say "something is wrong," and if he didn't say it, no one could be criticized. The problem is, in business you can't tell people they're wrong. He accepted all of these people "as is," and had to "guide" them rather than "correct" them. If someone asked him specifically "how" a technique should be done, he always replied, "Show me how YOU do it." Than he would offer advice on how to improve their interpretation of the technique. He knew it didn't make sense to teach a definitive technique in a business art where he wasn't going to be available to reinforce that definitive process. Unfortunately, the confusion was massive, in part, because of Parker himself. I remember standing in the back leaning against the wall in street clothes at a seminar where Mr. Parker was going over some technique ideas. One green belt leaned over to another and whispered, "Mr. Parker is teaching the technique wrong."
There was never ever anything wrong with the method of teaching, only the teachers that continued to deteriorate and spiral downward in knowledge and skill every generation. Their lack of understanding fueled a desire to have it both ways. They wanted thing fixed, but wanted "their fixed" to be everyone else's model, while they were allowed to explore and deviate to their desire.
The methodology crosses over into all interpretations and levels of Kenpo as I teach, and follows the old Chinese Traditional methods of "style or family" interpretations of the overall art, which was always taught in "phases" just like Parker intended.
Parker stated, and was very specific; In the first “phase” of learning the student should be subjected to a set curriculum with no variations, what ifs, or formulations because that is a different stage and to do otherwise not only confuses students, but doesn’t allow for enough physical repetition of the set model to create new synaptic pathways or “muscle memory.” "What if" training is for mid-level black belts, and formulation was for "masters" of the basics of the art.
The business of selling the art, is what brought these things, along with 'tailoring," and "re-arrangement" concepts down to students not qualified or skilled enough to do so. However, it did keep people interested in the art, and was obviously good for business. Unfortunately, it was never ever good for the art itself.
Mr. Parker supported my position, (or I supported his), in his own words from his published I.K.K.A. Green Belt Manual. These are direct quotes.
“In this phase, the term ideal implies that the situation is fixed and that the "what if" questions required in Phase II are not to be included in Phase I."
This is as I teach. The term “what if’ is forbidden for lower students. It is their job to learn the material, the ABC's of function if you will. It is more important to concentrate on basic skills and physical vocabulary that emphasizes body mechanics and techniques that are absolutely functional and capable of standing alone. Every technique in Phase I explore concepts of application, and teachers specific skills that can be explored in subsequent phases or levels. Mr. Parker further explains the conceptual IDEAL technique, once again in his words from the same source material, and I quote ....
“Therefore, the IDEAL techniques are built around seemingly INFLEXIBLE and one dimensional assumptions for a good purpose. They provide us with a basis from which we may BEGIN our analytical process. Prescribed techniques applied to prescribed reactions are the keys that make a basic technique IDEAL or FIXED.”
This is like a control model in any reliable scientific experiment. How can a beginning student begin the “analytical process” without a firm foundation to work from? When Ed Parker talked about “phases”, he wanted his black belt students to take his “ideas" and concepts, and create their own fixed technique.
That is they were supposed to extrapolate the base technique from the manual, and his conceptual teachings. He was teaching his students with schools and clubs HOW TO CREATE THEIR OWN INTERPRETATIONS for their students. He wanted them to use the Phase I "motion" system to create a personal interpretation for their own students, while exploring concepts of what ifs and formulations with them as teachers.
When you understand most of Ed Parker’s black belts came to him from other disciplines, you understand he had to teach on multiple levels with different people already established with schools and students all over the world. He knew if he began teaching someone already a black belt and students of his own “firm and different basics” he would loose them. That and his own personal availability to teach what was also evolving made that impossible. If he visited a student’s school in January and taught, when he saw him again the material could be different.
To create the business, Parker had to alter the traditional method of teaching and give way for proliferation, with the intent of returning to the "old ways" on a larger scale later with selected participants. "Motion" was the mass-market vehicle, but not the best vehicle for the art. That would have to come later, once he made the decision that proliferation was necessary first. When Mr. Parker created motion-based kenpo, he literally changed the Phases to suit the business.
In the traditional sense, Phase One was strict unalterable basics, forms, sets, and technique applications, as I teach now. Phase Two, allowed for additional "considerations," and Phase Three was for Master Professors only, who influenced the material the other two phases worked from.
When he created the "motion-base" and dubbed it Phase One, it destroyed the foundation from which all traditional arts derive their identity.
Instead, he allowed the identity to be drawn from its many ideas, instead of fixed principles of execution as other arts. This was the contradiction. While he quietly worked on Phase One American Kenpo, he promoted Phase One Motion-Kenpo, which has no place in traditional teaching. He told people to rely on motion, rearranging, and tailoring, while asserting that "Ideals should be fixed," and created by teachers. We must remember Mr. Parker was growing as a martial artist. He himself was not "fixed," and continued to change often. Motion-Kenpo was born in the late sixties. It became the problem child result of his many versions of his art, because it was out-of-control, but there wasn’t anything he could do about it, that wouldn't destroy the business he created.
Therefore, Ed Parker confused students because in the business of Motion-Kenpo, he allowed three contradicting phases and a non-traditional method of teaching to exist all at the same time. Realizing there was nothing he could do to stop it, he just continued sharing. However, it was never his intent for students of the business of kenpo, to be subjected to anything but phase I motion under the guidance of a teacher who would create plausible and fixed ideals, and the art itself would have a functional ceiling, until he created the next level.
Parker quotes continue;
“In Phase I, structuring an IDEAL technique requires SELECTING A COMBAT SITUATION YOU WISH TO ANALYZE. Contained within the technique should be FIXED MOVES OF DEFENSE, OFFENSE, AND THE ANTICIPATED REACTIONS that can stem from them.”
You can see here he’s talking to teachers of the art about the process they should use creating their own family style of his kenpo. Mr. Planas has stated this many times. The technique manuals are just a base of ideas to get the TEACHER started using Mr. Parker’s conceptual guidelines to insure function. Therefore, those who have used Motion-Kenpo as their base and then went on to create their own interpretation of techniques are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. No one is wrong, unless their interpretations are dysfunctional.
The “hard curriculum” of Ed Parker was, and has never been generally taught. Not teaching commercially allowed Mr. Parker to teach me and create hard curriculum dictated by his ever evolving desires and philosophies.
When Mr. Parker spoke of the "what if" he was speaking from the perspective of those who had enough knowledge to design their own techniques, and the mid-level skills and knowledge they should have for Phase II. Obviously "tailoring" is one thing but totally deviating from the "idea" of the manual meant you had to understand the process of designing a basic technique. In that process, you had to consider "what if" from the perspective of your external stimuli.
In other words, "what if" is not what he might do, but what he will do when I interact with him. Therefore, when you design a default or Ideal technique you must take into consideration your attacker's possible reactions.
Theoretically, when an attacker launches or initiates an assault, once you come in contact with him, you must consider what the results of your interaction will be in order to anticipate and plot your next move.
It would seem to me that this is the stage where you apply effective techniques you have learned to a self defense encounter to arrive at the correct solution by technique selection not so much by variation. For example, if a 400-pound man grabs a smaller stature person by the lapel a technique like "Lone Kimono may not be the best solution. They may want to redirect his energy and use an alternate technique like "Conquering Shield." The focus here would be on learning HOW to analyze the attacker and situation, instead of focusing on the eternal variations of an existing technique.
For those in the learning process choosing the correct response is more important than endless variations on a specific theme.
I would prefer to trust my spontaneity to a technique I have practiced a 1000 times, rather than tailoring a technique into something I may have done once. These two perspectives lead to much different approaches in the way you practice and learn a Kenpo system.
The "what if" is irrelevant without a significant solid base curriculum that is "hard wired' into your synaptic pathways, and fortified against Adrenal Stress Syndrome. It is unfortunate for many reared in the "commercial motion phase," to grasp or accept this rather obvious (to me) fact. However, those from outside seem to see it rather quickly when it is properly explained.
If you are a lower level student, it is more important to choose the right technique that you've been instructed in well, than tailor a response spontaneously when you have limited information, and undeveloped muscle memory. All of these things are intrinsically tied together, and the multiple levels of traditional study may not be explored simultaneously from the lower end of the spectrum.
It is encumbered upon us with the knowledge to formulate proper ideals to ensure that these ideal techniques not only function, but also cover all of the relevant and simply inherent possibilities of the action. Any major possibilities should be handled in alternate scenarios.
Nowhere in any of Ed Parkers writings does he refer to the techniques in the manuals, or anywhere else being Ideal. He is speaking conceptually as he usually did. He was specific about the concept, not about the model.
This has always been an area of confusion. Mr. Parker is speaking to those who desire to create their own style and techniques, and the process they should use, while utilizing his concepts as a base or starting point. Part of the confusion exists because Mr. Parker was not just speaking to his own followers. Infinite Insights was not written exclusively for Kenpo people. Mr. Parker was writing for all martial artists whom he hoped would use this process of logic. It had worked for many years when he encountered people from other styles. Many of his top people came from somewhere else and joined him when he explained this approach. It made sense, so he hoped others who would read infinite insights might join him as well. He was expanding his sphere of influence. His writing was “open ended.” That is also, why there are contradictions in Infinite Insights. He was trying to write for Kenpo and others simultaneously.
The prevailing level of Kenpo-Karate is supposed to teach you how to create your own effective style. That is why it is so flexible and interpretive. People all over the world have used this method very effectively. It is also why you cannot get two people together from even the same school who do all the techniques the same way, because they don’t have to. Concepts of Tailoring, Re-arrangement, and Equation Formulas that dominate make that impossible.
How can you emphasize all these things, and promote the Three Phases Concept simultaneously without giving people a definitive one way to do every technique, which he never did?
You can't.
How can you have an Equation Formula if you do not have an Ideal to begin with?
You can't?
For those who point to the “technique manuals” for the ideal technique, It’s no secret most of the techniques in the “manuals,” which were only supposed to give you general ideas, are NOT WORKABLE as they are written. Especially techniques that are hugs, locks, and holds, are not even clearly addressed. How many discussions have we had here about “modifications” to make a situation “work”? Do you really think Ed Parker would give you an ideal technique that didn’t work to begin with?
When asked how a technique went, he always said the same thing, “Show me how YOU do it.”
The “Three Phases Concept” is about a thought process. Mr. Parker had a problem with those who quoted him “chapter and verse” when he asked a question. He wanted people to think and even challenge him. He already knew what he wrote, but “what do you think” is what he wanted. If you did a technique, he never said, “You’re wrong.” He said, “Consider doing it this way, or maybe if you did this, it would work better for YOU.” So where is the ideal that is quoted so often? It doesn’t exist until YOU create it. Mr. Parker NEVER taught an IDEAL technique in motion kenpo-karate, he only spoke of the process.
He spent time teaching me the process, and the hard principles you absolutely must know fro the process. That is what I teach.
"What if his other foot is forward?"
It doesn’t change anything.
"What if he's about to throw a punch with the other hand?
You control his width when you execute properly.
"What if he tries to grapple?”
The base controls the space.
"What if ......."
Shut up and train!
http://www.kenpotalk.com/forum/showthread.php?12596-Misc-FAQ-Ramblings-amp-Stuff
Misc FAQ: Ramblings & Stuff
Ideals, What ifs and other ramblings
What if? Consider these sirs; a well designed default scenario, (ideal), should already consider these things. In my teaching, this is a given. Every technique scenario I teach, regardless of level, has a base realism component of canceling additional aggression. Not just on the initial assault, but throughout the sequence through to its conclusion.
In my view (supported by Parker), and the way I was taught by Mr. Parker, that is what the meaning of "ideal" is. The problem has always been since the launch into the "commercial era" of Kenpo, a misunderstanding of the function of the "manuals" and "Big Red" as guidelines, not instructional materials.
They were never designed to "stand alone" as instructional materials. As I've stated before, the only way Mr. Parker could proliferate his commercial product was to take black belts from other styles, and allowed them to teach his concepts. These black belts were to utilize the conceptual information as a starting point, and formulate their own product from it.
There is nothing in those technique manuals, that provides a definitive solution to any assault scenario, and they were never meant to be. They were in fact created to give a reasonably intelligent teacher, a LOOSE, BROAD starting point to begin their own process of formulating technique scenarios for their own teaching. This was for their down-line in a school or organization, to provide particular consistency for a group that worked together, with a broad general consistency to the overall art.
Once you stepped out of the lineage, school, or organization, there was NEVER an expectation of anything being the same with the commercial product. When Mr. Parker was alive, it essentially functioned as intended because only he could say "something is wrong," and if he didn't say it, no one could be criticized. The problem is, in business you can't tell people they're wrong. He accepted all of these people "as is," and had to "guide" them rather than "correct" them. If someone asked him specifically "how" a technique should be done, he always replied, "Show me how YOU do it." Than he would offer advice on how to improve their interpretation of the technique. He knew it didn't make sense to teach a definitive technique in a business art where he wasn't going to be available to reinforce that definitive process. Unfortunately, the confusion was massive, in part, because of Parker himself. I remember standing in the back leaning against the wall in street clothes at a seminar where Mr. Parker was going over some technique ideas. One green belt leaned over to another and whispered, "Mr. Parker is teaching the technique wrong."
There was never ever anything wrong with the method of teaching, only the teachers that continued to deteriorate and spiral downward in knowledge and skill every generation. Their lack of understanding fueled a desire to have it both ways. They wanted thing fixed, but wanted "their fixed" to be everyone else's model, while they were allowed to explore and deviate to their desire.
The methodology crosses over into all interpretations and levels of Kenpo as I teach, and follows the old Chinese Traditional methods of "style or family" interpretations of the overall art, which was always taught in "phases" just like Parker intended.
Parker stated, and was very specific; In the first “phase” of learning the student should be subjected to a set curriculum with no variations, what ifs, or formulations because that is a different stage and to do otherwise not only confuses students, but doesn’t allow for enough physical repetition of the set model to create new synaptic pathways or “muscle memory.” "What if" training is for mid-level black belts, and formulation was for "masters" of the basics of the art.
The business of selling the art, is what brought these things, along with 'tailoring," and "re-arrangement" concepts down to students not qualified or skilled enough to do so. However, it did keep people interested in the art, and was obviously good for business. Unfortunately, it was never ever good for the art itself.
Mr. Parker supported my position, (or I supported his), in his own words from his published I.K.K.A. Green Belt Manual. These are direct quotes.
“In this phase, the term ideal implies that the situation is fixed and that the "what if" questions required in Phase II are not to be included in Phase I."
This is as I teach. The term “what if’ is forbidden for lower students. It is their job to learn the material, the ABC's of function if you will. It is more important to concentrate on basic skills and physical vocabulary that emphasizes body mechanics and techniques that are absolutely functional and capable of standing alone. Every technique in Phase I explore concepts of application, and teachers specific skills that can be explored in subsequent phases or levels. Mr. Parker further explains the conceptual IDEAL technique, once again in his words from the same source material, and I quote ....
“Therefore, the IDEAL techniques are built around seemingly INFLEXIBLE and one dimensional assumptions for a good purpose. They provide us with a basis from which we may BEGIN our analytical process. Prescribed techniques applied to prescribed reactions are the keys that make a basic technique IDEAL or FIXED.”
This is like a control model in any reliable scientific experiment. How can a beginning student begin the “analytical process” without a firm foundation to work from? When Ed Parker talked about “phases”, he wanted his black belt students to take his “ideas" and concepts, and create their own fixed technique.
That is they were supposed to extrapolate the base technique from the manual, and his conceptual teachings. He was teaching his students with schools and clubs HOW TO CREATE THEIR OWN INTERPRETATIONS for their students. He wanted them to use the Phase I "motion" system to create a personal interpretation for their own students, while exploring concepts of what ifs and formulations with them as teachers.
When you understand most of Ed Parker’s black belts came to him from other disciplines, you understand he had to teach on multiple levels with different people already established with schools and students all over the world. He knew if he began teaching someone already a black belt and students of his own “firm and different basics” he would loose them. That and his own personal availability to teach what was also evolving made that impossible. If he visited a student’s school in January and taught, when he saw him again the material could be different.
To create the business, Parker had to alter the traditional method of teaching and give way for proliferation, with the intent of returning to the "old ways" on a larger scale later with selected participants. "Motion" was the mass-market vehicle, but not the best vehicle for the art. That would have to come later, once he made the decision that proliferation was necessary first. When Mr. Parker created motion-based kenpo, he literally changed the Phases to suit the business.
In the traditional sense, Phase One was strict unalterable basics, forms, sets, and technique applications, as I teach now. Phase Two, allowed for additional "considerations," and Phase Three was for Master Professors only, who influenced the material the other two phases worked from.
When he created the "motion-base" and dubbed it Phase One, it destroyed the foundation from which all traditional arts derive their identity.
Instead, he allowed the identity to be drawn from its many ideas, instead of fixed principles of execution as other arts. This was the contradiction. While he quietly worked on Phase One American Kenpo, he promoted Phase One Motion-Kenpo, which has no place in traditional teaching. He told people to rely on motion, rearranging, and tailoring, while asserting that "Ideals should be fixed," and created by teachers. We must remember Mr. Parker was growing as a martial artist. He himself was not "fixed," and continued to change often. Motion-Kenpo was born in the late sixties. It became the problem child result of his many versions of his art, because it was out-of-control, but there wasn’t anything he could do about it, that wouldn't destroy the business he created.
Therefore, Ed Parker confused students because in the business of Motion-Kenpo, he allowed three contradicting phases and a non-traditional method of teaching to exist all at the same time. Realizing there was nothing he could do to stop it, he just continued sharing. However, it was never his intent for students of the business of kenpo, to be subjected to anything but phase I motion under the guidance of a teacher who would create plausible and fixed ideals, and the art itself would have a functional ceiling, until he created the next level.
Parker quotes continue;
“In Phase I, structuring an IDEAL technique requires SELECTING A COMBAT SITUATION YOU WISH TO ANALYZE. Contained within the technique should be FIXED MOVES OF DEFENSE, OFFENSE, AND THE ANTICIPATED REACTIONS that can stem from them.”
You can see here he’s talking to teachers of the art about the process they should use creating their own family style of his kenpo. Mr. Planas has stated this many times. The technique manuals are just a base of ideas to get the TEACHER started using Mr. Parker’s conceptual guidelines to insure function. Therefore, those who have used Motion-Kenpo as their base and then went on to create their own interpretation of techniques are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. No one is wrong, unless their interpretations are dysfunctional.
The “hard curriculum” of Ed Parker was, and has never been generally taught. Not teaching commercially allowed Mr. Parker to teach me and create hard curriculum dictated by his ever evolving desires and philosophies.
When Mr. Parker spoke of the "what if" he was speaking from the perspective of those who had enough knowledge to design their own techniques, and the mid-level skills and knowledge they should have for Phase II. Obviously "tailoring" is one thing but totally deviating from the "idea" of the manual meant you had to understand the process of designing a basic technique. In that process, you had to consider "what if" from the perspective of your external stimuli.
In other words, "what if" is not what he might do, but what he will do when I interact with him. Therefore, when you design a default or Ideal technique you must take into consideration your attacker's possible reactions.
Theoretically, when an attacker launches or initiates an assault, once you come in contact with him, you must consider what the results of your interaction will be in order to anticipate and plot your next move.
It would seem to me that this is the stage where you apply effective techniques you have learned to a self defense encounter to arrive at the correct solution by technique selection not so much by variation. For example, if a 400-pound man grabs a smaller stature person by the lapel a technique like "Lone Kimono may not be the best solution. They may want to redirect his energy and use an alternate technique like "Conquering Shield." The focus here would be on learning HOW to analyze the attacker and situation, instead of focusing on the eternal variations of an existing technique.
For those in the learning process choosing the correct response is more important than endless variations on a specific theme.
I would prefer to trust my spontaneity to a technique I have practiced a 1000 times, rather than tailoring a technique into something I may have done once. These two perspectives lead to much different approaches in the way you practice and learn a Kenpo system.
The "what if" is irrelevant without a significant solid base curriculum that is "hard wired' into your synaptic pathways, and fortified against Adrenal Stress Syndrome. It is unfortunate for many reared in the "commercial motion phase," to grasp or accept this rather obvious (to me) fact. However, those from outside seem to see it rather quickly when it is properly explained.
If you are a lower level student, it is more important to choose the right technique that you've been instructed in well, than tailor a response spontaneously when you have limited information, and undeveloped muscle memory. All of these things are intrinsically tied together, and the multiple levels of traditional study may not be explored simultaneously from the lower end of the spectrum.
It is encumbered upon us with the knowledge to formulate proper ideals to ensure that these ideal techniques not only function, but also cover all of the relevant and simply inherent possibilities of the action. Any major possibilities should be handled in alternate scenarios.
Nowhere in any of Ed Parkers writings does he refer to the techniques in the manuals, or anywhere else being Ideal. He is speaking conceptually as he usually did. He was specific about the concept, not about the model.
This has always been an area of confusion. Mr. Parker is speaking to those who desire to create their own style and techniques, and the process they should use, while utilizing his concepts as a base or starting point. Part of the confusion exists because Mr. Parker was not just speaking to his own followers. Infinite Insights was not written exclusively for Kenpo people. Mr. Parker was writing for all martial artists whom he hoped would use this process of logic. It had worked for many years when he encountered people from other styles. Many of his top people came from somewhere else and joined him when he explained this approach. It made sense, so he hoped others who would read infinite insights might join him as well. He was expanding his sphere of influence. His writing was “open ended.” That is also, why there are contradictions in Infinite Insights. He was trying to write for Kenpo and others simultaneously.
The prevailing level of Kenpo-Karate is supposed to teach you how to create your own effective style. That is why it is so flexible and interpretive. People all over the world have used this method very effectively. It is also why you cannot get two people together from even the same school who do all the techniques the same way, because they don’t have to. Concepts of Tailoring, Re-arrangement, and Equation Formulas that dominate make that impossible.
How can you emphasize all these things, and promote the Three Phases Concept simultaneously without giving people a definitive one way to do every technique, which he never did?
You can't.
How can you have an Equation Formula if you do not have an Ideal to begin with?
You can't?
For those who point to the “technique manuals” for the ideal technique, It’s no secret most of the techniques in the “manuals,” which were only supposed to give you general ideas, are NOT WORKABLE as they are written. Especially techniques that are hugs, locks, and holds, are not even clearly addressed. How many discussions have we had here about “modifications” to make a situation “work”? Do you really think Ed Parker would give you an ideal technique that didn’t work to begin with?
When asked how a technique went, he always said the same thing, “Show me how YOU do it.”
The “Three Phases Concept” is about a thought process. Mr. Parker had a problem with those who quoted him “chapter and verse” when he asked a question. He wanted people to think and even challenge him. He already knew what he wrote, but “what do you think” is what he wanted. If you did a technique, he never said, “You’re wrong.” He said, “Consider doing it this way, or maybe if you did this, it would work better for YOU.” So where is the ideal that is quoted so often? It doesn’t exist until YOU create it. Mr. Parker NEVER taught an IDEAL technique in motion kenpo-karate, he only spoke of the process.
He spent time teaching me the process, and the hard principles you absolutely must know fro the process. That is what I teach.
"What if his other foot is forward?"
It doesn’t change anything.
"What if he's about to throw a punch with the other hand?
You control his width when you execute properly.
"What if he tries to grapple?”
The base controls the space.
"What if ......."
Shut up and train!
ATACX GYM
2nd Black Belt
First off? Amazing post.I would hit the PRAISE button instead of the THANKS button if we had one.I'm on board for most of this post,and because it's so good? I have lotsa questions and a few comments.
Second? Soooo...Mr.Parker never set up a specific inflexible "ideal" tech for "Motion-based Kenpo" but spoke extensively of the principles of CREATING a primary scenario from which we are to explore using his techs and our ideas combined as a base? He NEVER created a "fixed" ideal? That's revolutionary info to quite a few people,I would guess.I count myself among the numer of people finding this info to be revolutionary.If so,I'm not quite sure I follow you in certain areas.
Let's take say Captured Twigs as an example.Exactly as you stated,the techs as written ARE NOT WORKABLE.I assume that Mr. Parker is the sole or at least primary author of these techs and most of their names,etc. My main problem is...even the attacks I saw him executing tech responses to on film were of the unrealistic,"ideal" variety.With his experience,I don't accept that he couldn't or didn't know far more realistic ways to address whatever base scenarios he faced using his techs. I mean from the perspective of the attacker AND the defender.Furthermore,I assume that the people who came to him from various other systems are somewhat proficient themselves,and while I completely agree with much of the printed word and with what I understand the end result/goal of the various ideas and principles are,the movements that are purported to reach that goal immediately ring my THAT ISH SUCKS radar. Perhaps this is the result of the horrific dilution of Kenpo as it moved away from its functional roots,but...I for one absolutely think that the whole of this would have been averted by simply using the common sense and extremely commonly known solution of starting off with techs and counters to techs that obviously work against the most common and plausible attacks from jump street.Showing stuff that works is THE BEST WAY to keep your message clear and your principles deeply embedded in whatever successive students you have.Nobody forgot how to throw jabs and hooks because Cus D'amato passed away,and nobody lost the importance of jabbing and hooking or creating better and better ways to jab,hook,etc. after the sad event of Cus's passing too.
In other words? If Mr. Parker knew that the stuff he spoke about didn't coincide with the stuff he knew,and that the stuff is unworkable? Mr. Parker should've started with stuff that worked...as the best demonstration of the control group and the principles and extrapolation and allat other stuff too. I don't see how such a elementary decision could have slipped by him or anyone else. I had a brown belt from hapkido join up with me last week. I simply showed him the stuff that works.That's what made everything else work too. Showed him how to use his rolling skills better,both combatively and for calisthenics.Mr. Parker could have simply shown stuff that works when demo'ing his techs instead of stuff that's clearly suspect,like this right here which he did with Huk Planas:
http://youtu.be/zAo3CBTYug4
If Mr. Parker didn't create a consistent expression for his "fixed ideal" then what is this that he's doing with Huk Planas? I'm not doubting your word,Doc...I'm trying to understand here. I like the idea that Mr.Parker never HIMSELF promoted a specific "fixed ideal" as THEE expression (maybe he demo'd AN expression but never believed in a set,inflexible "THEE" expression) of his principles,but he seems to have rather consistently over the years did the same or largely the same movements over and over again...and frankly the videos of the movements of uke that I saw him respond to are almost 100% unrealistic and the responses,as you correctly noted,"ARE UNWORKABLE". Soooo...why do such a thing EVER? Commercial Kenpo or not...it should still work. Kenpo has a great deal in common with most Chinese,Korean and Japanese systems...it takes very little work to bridge the gap between them.For instance,many of my TKD and TSD friends learn my ATACX GYM Kenpo strikes and they have a great time adding it to their TKD and TSD.They practice the self-defense techs and add their own spin to it.Only 1 of them in 14 years offered to merge with me,but literally dozens if not a few hundred instructor and Master rank guys have learned from me via seminars and just free sharing clinics (and in the process I learned alot from them) over the past 14 years and we had a great time.Very little conflict,and Kenpo fit well with them.Sooo even guys from other systems would be bowled over faster and in greater numbers if...the stuff obviously worked and could be demonstrated right off top as feasible.
See,you could demo something real world more slowly and then pick up the speed,and everybody could see it works for real.You never need to mess with the goofy stuff that doesn't work and all your principles,etc. would be intact. Boxers would slowly show a bob and weave on a guy trying to throw hooks and counter with say a uppercut and hook.They'd slip a jab and cross thrown at them, jab and cross done slowly,then show it at street speed.Omg it works. If the hard principles Mr. Parker showed you are indeed as potent as we trust your word that they are,and since functionality is a concept older than everyone under 10,000 years old...um...why didn't he just show THAT stuff from the gate? He doesn't even have to show his special secret weapons. Fact is...demos that work are ALSO demos that look good. So even drawing crowds to the art of Kenpo is answered by...doing stuff that works. It's just a matter of advertising the real deal stuff that you have...not advertising the unworkable stuff for any reason whatsoever.
Grappling is stifled by controlling the base? Show me please. Doesn't matter if I punch with the other hand? Show me that too,thanks! Love to see it.Ed Parker already knew it if he showed it to you,Doc.Soooo many laypersons, martial artists and police and soldiers etc. would be nodding their heads as Mr.Parker spoke about the wonders of Kenpo,or say the marketing and advertising wizards that comprise much of "commercial Kenpo" did the same.But then we break out with the kind of stuff that we just saw in the video with Huk Planas and then the peeps who were nodding their heads at our WORDS see our ACTIONS and say:"Waitaminnit...what izzis unworkable mess you're showing me after all that lovely verbiage and erudite yakkery about principles and stuff?"
If it works? Show it. Then it'll sell itself. But THIS mess? That mess won't work. All of us know it. Sure Mr. Parker is human and stuff and that's both a strength and failing that we all share...but he knew that stuff didn't work BEFORE he starting demo'ing it with Huk.So why do that stuff that you know doesn't work at all and why not show the stuff that works from jump street?
Second? Soooo...Mr.Parker never set up a specific inflexible "ideal" tech for "Motion-based Kenpo" but spoke extensively of the principles of CREATING a primary scenario from which we are to explore using his techs and our ideas combined as a base? He NEVER created a "fixed" ideal? That's revolutionary info to quite a few people,I would guess.I count myself among the numer of people finding this info to be revolutionary.If so,I'm not quite sure I follow you in certain areas.
Let's take say Captured Twigs as an example.Exactly as you stated,the techs as written ARE NOT WORKABLE.I assume that Mr. Parker is the sole or at least primary author of these techs and most of their names,etc. My main problem is...even the attacks I saw him executing tech responses to on film were of the unrealistic,"ideal" variety.With his experience,I don't accept that he couldn't or didn't know far more realistic ways to address whatever base scenarios he faced using his techs. I mean from the perspective of the attacker AND the defender.Furthermore,I assume that the people who came to him from various other systems are somewhat proficient themselves,and while I completely agree with much of the printed word and with what I understand the end result/goal of the various ideas and principles are,the movements that are purported to reach that goal immediately ring my THAT ISH SUCKS radar. Perhaps this is the result of the horrific dilution of Kenpo as it moved away from its functional roots,but...I for one absolutely think that the whole of this would have been averted by simply using the common sense and extremely commonly known solution of starting off with techs and counters to techs that obviously work against the most common and plausible attacks from jump street.Showing stuff that works is THE BEST WAY to keep your message clear and your principles deeply embedded in whatever successive students you have.Nobody forgot how to throw jabs and hooks because Cus D'amato passed away,and nobody lost the importance of jabbing and hooking or creating better and better ways to jab,hook,etc. after the sad event of Cus's passing too.
In other words? If Mr. Parker knew that the stuff he spoke about didn't coincide with the stuff he knew,and that the stuff is unworkable? Mr. Parker should've started with stuff that worked...as the best demonstration of the control group and the principles and extrapolation and allat other stuff too. I don't see how such a elementary decision could have slipped by him or anyone else. I had a brown belt from hapkido join up with me last week. I simply showed him the stuff that works.That's what made everything else work too. Showed him how to use his rolling skills better,both combatively and for calisthenics.Mr. Parker could have simply shown stuff that works when demo'ing his techs instead of stuff that's clearly suspect,like this right here which he did with Huk Planas:
http://youtu.be/zAo3CBTYug4
If Mr. Parker didn't create a consistent expression for his "fixed ideal" then what is this that he's doing with Huk Planas? I'm not doubting your word,Doc...I'm trying to understand here. I like the idea that Mr.Parker never HIMSELF promoted a specific "fixed ideal" as THEE expression (maybe he demo'd AN expression but never believed in a set,inflexible "THEE" expression) of his principles,but he seems to have rather consistently over the years did the same or largely the same movements over and over again...and frankly the videos of the movements of uke that I saw him respond to are almost 100% unrealistic and the responses,as you correctly noted,"ARE UNWORKABLE". Soooo...why do such a thing EVER? Commercial Kenpo or not...it should still work. Kenpo has a great deal in common with most Chinese,Korean and Japanese systems...it takes very little work to bridge the gap between them.For instance,many of my TKD and TSD friends learn my ATACX GYM Kenpo strikes and they have a great time adding it to their TKD and TSD.They practice the self-defense techs and add their own spin to it.Only 1 of them in 14 years offered to merge with me,but literally dozens if not a few hundred instructor and Master rank guys have learned from me via seminars and just free sharing clinics (and in the process I learned alot from them) over the past 14 years and we had a great time.Very little conflict,and Kenpo fit well with them.Sooo even guys from other systems would be bowled over faster and in greater numbers if...the stuff obviously worked and could be demonstrated right off top as feasible.
See,you could demo something real world more slowly and then pick up the speed,and everybody could see it works for real.You never need to mess with the goofy stuff that doesn't work and all your principles,etc. would be intact. Boxers would slowly show a bob and weave on a guy trying to throw hooks and counter with say a uppercut and hook.They'd slip a jab and cross thrown at them, jab and cross done slowly,then show it at street speed.Omg it works. If the hard principles Mr. Parker showed you are indeed as potent as we trust your word that they are,and since functionality is a concept older than everyone under 10,000 years old...um...why didn't he just show THAT stuff from the gate? He doesn't even have to show his special secret weapons. Fact is...demos that work are ALSO demos that look good. So even drawing crowds to the art of Kenpo is answered by...doing stuff that works. It's just a matter of advertising the real deal stuff that you have...not advertising the unworkable stuff for any reason whatsoever.
Grappling is stifled by controlling the base? Show me please. Doesn't matter if I punch with the other hand? Show me that too,thanks! Love to see it.Ed Parker already knew it if he showed it to you,Doc.Soooo many laypersons, martial artists and police and soldiers etc. would be nodding their heads as Mr.Parker spoke about the wonders of Kenpo,or say the marketing and advertising wizards that comprise much of "commercial Kenpo" did the same.But then we break out with the kind of stuff that we just saw in the video with Huk Planas and then the peeps who were nodding their heads at our WORDS see our ACTIONS and say:"Waitaminnit...what izzis unworkable mess you're showing me after all that lovely verbiage and erudite yakkery about principles and stuff?"
If it works? Show it. Then it'll sell itself. But THIS mess? That mess won't work. All of us know it. Sure Mr. Parker is human and stuff and that's both a strength and failing that we all share...but he knew that stuff didn't work BEFORE he starting demo'ing it with Huk.So why do that stuff that you know doesn't work at all and why not show the stuff that works from jump street?
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
the irony is just too good to pass up.Pretty sure you were on the recieving end of that exact sentence about 2 weeks ago.Still no proof........ but i aint interested in wasting my time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In regards to Kenpo, the techniques, as written, do work. They do exactly what they are supposed to do, teach concepts.
And they do that exceedingly well.
one must learn the concepts FIRST, or nothing else will be accomplished.
THATS why you learn it the right way,or "ideal phase" FIRST, so you dont end up with some jackass who thinks he knows everything but never learned the CONCEPTS in the first place.
IF you have taken the time, and learned the concepts, you will be able to adapt to any "what if"
Doc's post would seem to bear this out.
ATACX GYM
2nd Black Belt
In regards to me being on the receiving end of the question I posed? Well,that was taken out of context.I'm asking the question from the perspective of someone who not only knows that EPAK works as I've used it many a time and did so again just yesterday but takes it on faith that Mr. Parker knew it as well...else it'd be pretty difficult for Mr.Parker to teach Doc techs and principles that work well if Mr. Parker didn't know them a priori. My question centered on TRAINING PHILOSOPHY,not TECHNICAL EFFICACY.
IIRC where you and I differed,Twin Fist,is on TECHNICAL EFFICACY.Whether a technique worked PERIOD,instead of TRAINING PHILOSOPHY.Perhaps you conflated the two.If you felt that head kicks,spin kicks,and combat acrobatics are asinine and they offend your TRAINING PHILOSOPHY but didn't take the position that these techniques DON'T WORK? Then I'd have never gainsayed your position.Instead,you repeatedly and bluntly stated that head kicks don't work in self defense.You also saw my cartwheel kick and on the basis of that alone contended that capoeira itself didn't work AT ALL,much less for self-defense. You then combined these three points as if they were one cogent position.I provided video of elite self-defense forces executing head kicks and combination kicks,showed the distinct parallel between capoeira rolls and movements and movements that spetsnaz and other guys do,and I presented video evidence of people like Anderson Silva and a host of other h2h specialists who are better than you either training in disciplines or successfully doing the exact same thing you said DIDN'T WORK PERIOD against people better than you (like Vitor Belfort and Randy Couture).Whether or not they did the tech in the Octagon is immaterial,because they're flat out better than you and so are their opponents.If they fought you in the alley or a stairwell and decided to boot your noggin? Your noggin would be booted.There ya are.And it's not because they're superhuman.I showed videos of lesser lights doing the same thing to opponents of roughly equal position.I'm thinking that if Raymond Daniels or Mike Pombeiro or Kim Do decided to boot your noggin? Your noggin would be booted.Despite the fact that they're point fighters.Same with the Lopez Family of USA OLYMPIC TAEKWONDO.Etc.It's not an issue of the technique's efficacy per se,but also how the tech is trained,who's attacking with the tech and who's defending v the tech.These are manageable variables that can very speedily be manipulated to your advantage the overwhelming majority of the time.In that sense,it doesn't vary AT ALL from any other self-defense tech...which myself and the likes of Flying Crane and Josh were saying over and over again.What's really hilarious is that over the decades there've been literally thousands of guys like Jeff Speakman and Sijo Muhammed who are potent head kickers,yet you don't denigrate EPAK at all.Matta fact? GM Donnie Williams in a seminar in his tournament nearly 20 years ago when asked about The Founders specifically stated that DOC WAS A NOTED KICKER IN HIS DAY.
Back to the "ideal" phase...
...here's the bottom line on that,and it's OBVIOUS to anyone who places performance on a pedestal above all else: If you're doing it right? Your concepts are right.If you're doing it wrong? Your concepts--specifically TRAINING concepts--are wrong.If you're presenting defenses that don't work vs techs that are stilted as if they're viable self defense? That's wakk too.Doesn't matter if you're me,you,Mr.Parker,some Vulcans,or God. With the aforementioned as a given,then one of the questions I would ask is: Why not show the stuff that works from Day One? Taa-daaa.No problems.As Bruce Lee would say,there's none of the current bogging down of the system resultant from our gigantic misunderstanding and misapplication of the "classical mess". Against the bear hug? SHOW ONE KENPO TECH THAT WORKS EXACTLY AS SHOWN. Doc's SL-4 does that quite well,against the static bear hug.Once you know that? You can move onto other stuff.My ATACX GYM UPGRADED KENPO does that too.Very well. People can screech about whether or not it's the same stuff that THEY know,but one thing that can't be said with any form of accurate,truthful rigorousness is that my techs don't work.
Maybe Mr. Parker didn't figure that we were as a whole smart enough or prepped enough to grasp where he was going and more specifically start trying to get ourselves to get to "going" but using his techs and most importantly concepts as a base to "go" express and innovate. "How do YOU do it?" just like Doc said. I remember reading somewhere that Bruce had similar misgivings at some point,and back in the '60's Bruce was extremely secretive about what he did and how did his "personal" JKD. I remember a very senior Kenpo BB strongly intimating that Mr.Parker was similar in that regard,AND that Mr.Parker was skillful manipulator of the people around him.He could be a cutthroat political animal when he wished,this person rather bluntly confided,and even intimated that Mr.Parker wasn't above playing members of his own inner circle against one another.Combine this with what Doc stated regarding the difference between the triad of hard principles that Mr.Parker taught Doc,Mr.Parker's own personal continuing development and the commericalized "motion Kenpo"? We've got a pretty comprehensive explanation of the broad roots of dooficity that sprouted the welter of fueding Kenpo organizations that looks like the roots and branches of Yggdrasil and the Gordian Knot had a love child.
Glad I'm staunchly apolitical when it comes to Kenpo organizational mess.
Ras, I think a big part of the disconnect in the Kenpo system as a whole is the idea that Mr. Parker came up with these ideas and then presented them as a unit to the martial arts world. The reality is that many of our techniques are versions of old Chinese techniques, adaptations of Japanese and Korean techniques from several styles, and even a little Professional Wrestling thrown into the mix. As Doc points out all the time, he surrounded himself with other accomplished martial artists, and then explained his vision and told them to go out and reproduce it on their own.
Some of them did, and have, and that's great. Some of them did for a while, and then stopped. Or did their own thing from day one. Or taught Parker's system, but then when Parker updated or changed the system they got tired of re-learning the "new" method and just went on teaching what they'd already learned. He was taking black belts in TKD and Shotokan and JiuJitsu and giving them a binder full of notes and saying, "go teach this, you can call it EPAK, and I'll endorse your school." It promoted his ideas, and everybody made a little cheddar, and karate was genuinely better for it. But a TKD guy is going to teach those techniques differently than a Karate guy, even if only in emphasis. And two generations later everybody's doing EPAK and none of it looks the same.
Ed Parker's American Kenpo doesn't have a clear successor because it was never a unified practice to begin with. It was a bunch of dudes who trained with a genuine prodigy. Some were better, some were worse, all got a boost from standing in his shadow. Of course, he got a boost too. It's pretty clear that while he had ultimate say over what became canon, a number of the traditionally accepted patterns in the system were either originated by or contributed to by other black belts he worked with.
In the end, Mr. Parker did start by showing us what works. What works is using your brain. To feel is to believe. So if you can't feel it, don't believe it. And if someone shows you something better, don't be an ignorant ***. Open your brain cage and let the knowledge pour in. He changed his techniques. He changed his teaching. He changed his method. Because he learned. Too many of us want to skip that step.
For lots of people all over the place the ideal phase techniques work just fine. For others, they are completely insufficient. I've had that argument many times. In the end, what works for you is what's most important. And passing that on to our students. Because our instructors won't be fighting our battles. If you survive, you did it right. If you die, you did it wrong.
Now, as instructors we should make an effort only to teach the best material possible. Because we owe it to our students and those who came before us. You say show me a bearhug technique that works. I can make the bearhug techniques work just fine. But I don't stop teaching bearhugs at the techniques. I teach the bearhug as a fully developed techniques, from all directions, standing and lying down, arms pinned or free or both, lifting, pressing, and dropping, as a sacrifice technique or a control maneuver, in combination with grappling, poison hands, and off hand striking, and head position, and balance. I teach establishing a base, and grapevining, and counter-grappling, and sitting into the hug. And when you understand all that about bearhugs, the techniques make sense in a completely different way. Then the ideal phase technique has a context. Then you can make a bearhug defense work because you know what a bearhug is.
I think too many schools skip past the ideal phase of the basic maneuvers and techniques. There's no point discussing an ideal phase roundhouse kick defense if nobody understands an ideal phase roundhouse kick. You can't make a knife technique work if you don't understand knives. And when you do, you may realize that the ideal phase self defense technique doesn't work as written, or as taught, or as practiced. But that doesn't mean that there isn't an ideal response to a roundhouse kick. And I think many of us realize that and try to teach those responses.
In the end, Ideal Phase in the motion kenpo model seems to me to be most important as a way of transmitting the basic elements of a system of striking and grappling based loosely on the chinese model of unarmed self-defense. I know that in other, more specific methods such as SL4, the ideal phase has a different role. And I respect that. I want my students to be able to formulate spontaneously while using ideal basics. That's my goal. And the system I teach works very well for that. But it requires a knowledgable, experienced instructor with a dedication to self improvement and continuing education. Because the lists on the walls are just names. On their own, they aren't karate.
For the record, I don't think the knife techniques work, I wouldn't practice the gun techniques as written, and I think some of the combination defenses and two man techniques are too contrived to be much use on their own. But put in the context of a more fleshed out martial arts curriculum that addresses multiple phases of combat in a dynamic environment, I still think they have use. So I still teach them. In part, because Mr. Parker taught them and I want to continue to adhere to his tradition. I don't think that stops me from fostering effectiveness in my students.
Coming up, I was always taught that Kenpo is a system, not a style. I know that Doc emphasizes that his SL4 is actually the opposite, and I respect that. But the kenpo I was taught combines analyzation with application. Bookwork and body work. And it works. But only if you have good instructors to walk you through it. The lists are like a general set of directions based on landmarks instead of street addresses, but on their own they aren't enough to get you to the destination. That requires an experienced guide. And one who keeps going back over the territory to see if there's anything new he needs to learn.
-Rob
Some of them did, and have, and that's great. Some of them did for a while, and then stopped. Or did their own thing from day one. Or taught Parker's system, but then when Parker updated or changed the system they got tired of re-learning the "new" method and just went on teaching what they'd already learned. He was taking black belts in TKD and Shotokan and JiuJitsu and giving them a binder full of notes and saying, "go teach this, you can call it EPAK, and I'll endorse your school." It promoted his ideas, and everybody made a little cheddar, and karate was genuinely better for it. But a TKD guy is going to teach those techniques differently than a Karate guy, even if only in emphasis. And two generations later everybody's doing EPAK and none of it looks the same.
Ed Parker's American Kenpo doesn't have a clear successor because it was never a unified practice to begin with. It was a bunch of dudes who trained with a genuine prodigy. Some were better, some were worse, all got a boost from standing in his shadow. Of course, he got a boost too. It's pretty clear that while he had ultimate say over what became canon, a number of the traditionally accepted patterns in the system were either originated by or contributed to by other black belts he worked with.
In the end, Mr. Parker did start by showing us what works. What works is using your brain. To feel is to believe. So if you can't feel it, don't believe it. And if someone shows you something better, don't be an ignorant ***. Open your brain cage and let the knowledge pour in. He changed his techniques. He changed his teaching. He changed his method. Because he learned. Too many of us want to skip that step.
For lots of people all over the place the ideal phase techniques work just fine. For others, they are completely insufficient. I've had that argument many times. In the end, what works for you is what's most important. And passing that on to our students. Because our instructors won't be fighting our battles. If you survive, you did it right. If you die, you did it wrong.
Now, as instructors we should make an effort only to teach the best material possible. Because we owe it to our students and those who came before us. You say show me a bearhug technique that works. I can make the bearhug techniques work just fine. But I don't stop teaching bearhugs at the techniques. I teach the bearhug as a fully developed techniques, from all directions, standing and lying down, arms pinned or free or both, lifting, pressing, and dropping, as a sacrifice technique or a control maneuver, in combination with grappling, poison hands, and off hand striking, and head position, and balance. I teach establishing a base, and grapevining, and counter-grappling, and sitting into the hug. And when you understand all that about bearhugs, the techniques make sense in a completely different way. Then the ideal phase technique has a context. Then you can make a bearhug defense work because you know what a bearhug is.
I think too many schools skip past the ideal phase of the basic maneuvers and techniques. There's no point discussing an ideal phase roundhouse kick defense if nobody understands an ideal phase roundhouse kick. You can't make a knife technique work if you don't understand knives. And when you do, you may realize that the ideal phase self defense technique doesn't work as written, or as taught, or as practiced. But that doesn't mean that there isn't an ideal response to a roundhouse kick. And I think many of us realize that and try to teach those responses.
In the end, Ideal Phase in the motion kenpo model seems to me to be most important as a way of transmitting the basic elements of a system of striking and grappling based loosely on the chinese model of unarmed self-defense. I know that in other, more specific methods such as SL4, the ideal phase has a different role. And I respect that. I want my students to be able to formulate spontaneously while using ideal basics. That's my goal. And the system I teach works very well for that. But it requires a knowledgable, experienced instructor with a dedication to self improvement and continuing education. Because the lists on the walls are just names. On their own, they aren't karate.
For the record, I don't think the knife techniques work, I wouldn't practice the gun techniques as written, and I think some of the combination defenses and two man techniques are too contrived to be much use on their own. But put in the context of a more fleshed out martial arts curriculum that addresses multiple phases of combat in a dynamic environment, I still think they have use. So I still teach them. In part, because Mr. Parker taught them and I want to continue to adhere to his tradition. I don't think that stops me from fostering effectiveness in my students.
Coming up, I was always taught that Kenpo is a system, not a style. I know that Doc emphasizes that his SL4 is actually the opposite, and I respect that. But the kenpo I was taught combines analyzation with application. Bookwork and body work. And it works. But only if you have good instructors to walk you through it. The lists are like a general set of directions based on landmarks instead of street addresses, but on their own they aren't enough to get you to the destination. That requires an experienced guide. And one who keeps going back over the territory to see if there's anything new he needs to learn.
-Rob
ATACX GYM
2nd Black Belt
Not surprised you'd take SGM Parker's word for it.Especially since that's exactly what he said NOT to do.You're supposed to make your own explorations,acquire your own knowledge,make your own interpretations using his techs and concepts as a base combined with whatever it is that you come up with. "How would YOU do it?" is how Doc said Mr.Parker would approach it,remember?
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
But which word? He teaches Raining Lance on page 51 of The Women's Guide to Self Defense, and on page 146 of Kenpo Karate, and page 170 of Infinite Insights Into Kenpo Volume 5. And none of these defenses are exactly the same or exactly like the one in the EPAK manual, which is never taught the same way twice in any two schools. You don't even find this attack in Mitose's What is Self Defense, although you find similar defenses which could easily be adapted.
But regardless of what Mr. Parker's "word" was on the subject, there's another important issue here and that's that these defenses aren't unique to Mr. Parker's work. Take for instance the technique Entangled Wing.This same technique is taught in Nicolaes Petter's Clear Instructions for the Excellent Art of Wrestling as a defense against a Wrap Around Shoulder Lock like the one in Obscure Claws. First published in 1674. In Holland. And I don't think he invented it either.
The discussion is a little narrow minded. These techniques exist because throughout time and place man has tried to kill man, and that has led to a consensus about what works. It isn't TKD kicking or Kenpo striking or BJJ grappling or Boxing guard or Muay Thai roundhouse. It's just fighting. It's combat. There are ways to move the body to hurt someone, and we are all exploring and perfecting those ways. Ideal phase is the way you describe it in your school. But that's never static, because we're never done learning. We each express it differently because we've each learned different things so far. But there is no final say. Just more training.
-Rob
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
the one that created the 3 phase method of learning and innovation, as outlined by Doc.
anyone that jumps to phase 3, which as Doc has pointed out was only for senior professors, without having spent the 40 years required to do so doesnt know what they are talking about.
SGM PArker's go out and innovate should have been, and was prob meant to be "go out an innovate once you are qualified to do so"
thats the whole problem with Kenpo these days, too many people claiming they know more than Mr Parker did, or that they know BETTER than he did
ATACX GYM
2nd Black Belt
See why I like this guy?^^^Izzat a good post,or what? It's not often that Doc will weigh in at length on a topic,and he always merks it when he does...and a thread gets better still when Rob does stuff like this.Very good job,guys.Me like this convo.
Okay,but my point...the issue that I'm driving home...is being misunderstood.Allow me to simplify:
I already know that modern kenpo is a synthesis of Chinese,Japanese,Korean,and American influences.So did Mr.Parker. What I'm saying very simply and bluntly is: whatever alleged combat,mental,or whatever benefits that one may get from whichever way you do the ideal phase? You'll get more faster deeper and in all other ways better benefits if you make certain that your techs work as designed.Period.Therefore,as a matter of performance,the ideal phase as we have known it for the past 30 years is clearly inferior to the functional model. Doc says that Mr.Parker already knew this,which is a working hypothesis that I reached long before I ever heard the phrase:"ideal phase". As a matter of performance,we all agree more or less that the ideal phase--however it came to be,however it was authored--is inferior to the functional model.Otherwise,EVERY tech we've been shown would obviously and soundly work right from jump.Clearly that's not the case. Doc says that EPAK got out of Mr.Parker's control,which does an excellent job of explaining what happened FURTHER DOWN THE LINE to Kenpo.
Nobody has said anything that directly explains why Mr.Parker showed stuff which he knew doesn't work as shown when he already knew that showing stuff that works as shown is SUPERIOR to doing the opposite. I would guess that he looked at demo's as a way to entice the masses,but showing the stuff that works entices the masses more.Take a look at the popularity of boxing,judo,wrestling,etc. during Mr.Parker's time and ours.Boxing is still the king of sport combat,and judo is 2nd only to soccer in worldwide participation.Both put superior functionality with superior results squarely in the forefront.Take a look at yoga and tai chi.For matters of health? They're hands down the most popularly practiced arts and disciplines worldwide.Even in Mr.Parker's time.
That's it.That's my whole mantra.We know that quite a bit of what is in the ideal phase does NOT work as shown.No matter how vast and deep your knowledge gets,it's better if ALL your stuff works.Period.
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
if you dont spend time learning the technique in the ideal phase, your techniques will be sloppy as **** no matter what else you try to do
lots of people want to run marathons, but you have to build up to it. You HAVE to crawl before you walk, walk before you run, and run before you run far.
thinking your can skip any part of that chain is .......incorrect
lots of people want to run marathons, but you have to build up to it. You HAVE to crawl before you walk, walk before you run, and run before you run far.
thinking your can skip any part of that chain is .......incorrect
I think part of why he had to teach his art through demonstration material is because he wanted to teach civilians. You're right, people are excited about what works. But they're also scared of it. By all accounts he took out the elements of ground work contained within the system because it was hard to sell in a commercial model. I think he wanted a product he could sell to kids, and moms, and business professionals who couldn't go into work tomorrow with black eyes or twisted ankles. If my wife so much as sprained her wrist she couldn't do her job. Period. We'd lose thousands and maybe she'd be fired. You can't teach someone like that competitive boxing.
But they can learn dance. And a good karate instructor can show them how the dance is really karate and how karate is really combat. I think he taught things that impressed the public so that they would come in the door and eat the cake. And once they ate the cake, they would develop a taste for bread.
I learned the Ideal Phase techniques of the motion system. And I learned that I needed to supplement my practice with live training and dynamic drills. It seems you learned the same lesson. Good thing Parker left something behind for us to find. I don't think he ever meant for us to stop looking once we did.
I'm not saying I know everything he knew, or better than he knew, or more than he knew. I probably never will. He was a unique man at a unique point in time. But I'm not him. I'm here. Now. And all I can do is my best. So I practice the method he left behind, while constantly seeking to improve the method I will leave behind. I think we're all on that path.
-Rob
But they can learn dance. And a good karate instructor can show them how the dance is really karate and how karate is really combat. I think he taught things that impressed the public so that they would come in the door and eat the cake. And once they ate the cake, they would develop a taste for bread.
I learned the Ideal Phase techniques of the motion system. And I learned that I needed to supplement my practice with live training and dynamic drills. It seems you learned the same lesson. Good thing Parker left something behind for us to find. I don't think he ever meant for us to stop looking once we did.
I'm not saying I know everything he knew, or better than he knew, or more than he knew. I probably never will. He was a unique man at a unique point in time. But I'm not him. I'm here. Now. And all I can do is my best. So I practice the method he left behind, while constantly seeking to improve the method I will leave behind. I think we're all on that path.
-Rob
I agree completely. That's why I posted this up above.
Any time the question is "how can I get better at kenpo?" the answer can only be "go back on to the training floor and do some more kenpo." In the end, marathon or sprint, we can only get there by putting one foot in front of the other.
-Rob
And IMO, this, I feel, is probably one of the main issues with the system. Doc and Ras both touched on this, in saying that the techniques, as taught, are not workable. This tells me, and Doc, or someone else who knows, please feel free to correct me, that it was either up to the a) teacher or b) student, to figure it out and make it work. In a nutshell, he (Parker) wasn't going to spoon feed the students.
So, if thats the case, then obviously, we dont see this happening, because of all the issues that we've been talking about for the last 8 pages. LOL.
I think this is probably the #1 reason why we have people revamping the art, adding/removing things, and others saying that if that happens, you're no longer doing Kenpo. Here's a thought....and again, I'm no expert on the art, so someone with more 'know', please comment. Lets look at Kajukenbo. We had Sijo who taught the art to many. 2 of those people are GGM Gaylord and GM Ramos. Both of these gentlemen created their own versions, ie: the Gaylord and Ramos methods. I have to wonder....in the Kaju world, are there people in the "Original" method, that feel that those 2 other methods, are not worthy of being called Kaju? IMO, if I had to wager a guess, I'd say they're just as respected. Funny...you have the yearly tourny in Vegas.....people from all Kaju branches go, right? You had Fight Quest.....I wasn't there, but I'd imagine there were reps. from all branches.
So, if thats the case, then obviously, we dont see this happening, because of all the issues that we've been talking about for the last 8 pages. LOL.
I think this is probably the #1 reason why we have people revamping the art, adding/removing things, and others saying that if that happens, you're no longer doing Kenpo. Here's a thought....and again, I'm no expert on the art, so someone with more 'know', please comment. Lets look at Kajukenbo. We had Sijo who taught the art to many. 2 of those people are GGM Gaylord and GM Ramos. Both of these gentlemen created their own versions, ie: the Gaylord and Ramos methods. I have to wonder....in the Kaju world, are there people in the "Original" method, that feel that those 2 other methods, are not worthy of being called Kaju? IMO, if I had to wager a guess, I'd say they're just as respected. Funny...you have the yearly tourny in Vegas.....people from all Kaju branches go, right? You had Fight Quest.....I wasn't there, but I'd imagine there were reps. from all branches.
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
-
重心 Zhòngxīn center of gravity
- Latest: Wing Woo Gar
-