Is More Better?

[Flying Crane]

A number of years ago I was tinkering with the Tracy curriculum for my own reasons, and organized all the techs based on type of attack.

Tracys has 250 techs from white belt to first black. There are additional techs thru 5th black, with a grand total of 381, according to the official lists. However, many of these techs have variations (in my opinion some variations are more worthy than others). If you count all of the variations, there are supposedly 600. I've never bothered to count them myself.

When I was done tinkering with the list, I found that there were a huge number of techs against a punch of some sort or other. Some from the front, some from the side, some were single punches, others punch combos, some kick/punch combos. I don't remember the number offhand, I'll have to see if I still have those notes lying around somewhere... but I think there were something like 170 or so, out of the total 381.

Just giving some perspective...

 

[Flying Crane]

When I look at Ed Parker's Kenpo and its descendants, I see a principle based system masquerading as a technique based system. What does that mean? What I've noticed about EPAK and the rest is that they have laundry lists of techniques, but each technique is built on underlying principles. These principles show up again and again thorughout the system, so that a student, while working on "the yellow belt techniques" is actually embedding the principles and how to apply them in different situations.

From many of the discussions that I've seen here and over on Kenpotalk, my impression is just the opposite.

First, I don't believe most people have a strong grasp of what a Principle really is. Instead, they identify notions that might be a good idea under specific circumstances, and elevate that to a Principle. But I don't believe it really is.

I see kenpo techs as built upon good ideas under certain circumstances, that may not be good ideas if the circumstances change. In short, they are not universally applicable almost virtually all circumstances. They are not built upon principles. Or if there are principles in the mix, most people have not been able to identify what they really are and fail to give them the focus and attention that they deserve.

This may not have always been true, and it may not be true for some kenpoists, but I believe that kenpo has mostly become a technique art that tries to be principle based, but often fails.

 

[Touch Of Death]

From many of the discussions that I've seen here and over on Kenpotalk, my impression is just the opposite.

First, I don't believe most people have a strong grasp of what a Principle really is. Instead, they identify notions that might be a good idea under specific circumstances, and elevate that to a Principle. But I don't believe it really is.

I see kenpo techs as built upon good ideas under certain circumstances, that may not be good ideas if the circumstances change. In short, they are not universally applicable almost virtually all circumstances. They are not built upon principles. Or if there are principles in the mix, most people have not been able to identify what they really are and fail to give them the focus and attention that they deserve.

This may not have always been true, and it may not be true for some kenpoists, but I believe that kenpo has mostly become a technique art that tries to be principle based, but often fails.

Yeah, but that's in those OTHER schools.
Sean

 

[Flying Crane]

Yeah, but that's in those OTHER schools.
Sean

I'll just say that I believe it's prevalent in ALL lineages.

 

[KELLYG]

Quote from Flying Crane "Tracys has 250 techs from white belt to first black. There are additional techs thru 5th black, with a grand total of 381, according to the official lists. However, many of these techs have variations (in my opinion some variations are more worthy than others). If you count all of the variations, there are supposedly 600. I've never bothered to count them myself."

YIKES that is a lot of techniques to remember, or in my case, try to remember. I think, that exposure to a wide variety of techniques or self defense scenarios is awesome. As stated before, not all self defense techniques are created equally for everyone, so some filtering to what works for you is necessary. But 600 variations, man that is a lot ...

 

[MJS]

I believe the less techs the better, too many and it just becomes confusing. In saying that though, you must learn heaps of techs to see which ones work better for you personally. I try and learn as much as I can but discard heaps and just keep the ones that suit my body type, strength etc . The ones I 'discard' I can still do and teach if necessry but just choose not to persue them by practicing them over and over because I know that if push comes to shove I would never use them. Those same techs, though, may be preferred by others so I think its important for me to know them even if I wouldnt actually use them.

I'm going to agree and disagree for a moment. I agree that less is better, and use the JKD mentality of take whats useful, discard the rest.

What I disagree on is that you need to learn a ton before you can condense. Here are my thoughts on that: IMO, our techniques are really nothing more than a series of basics, ie: punches, kicks, blocks, etc, all put together in a specific fashion, to deal with a specific attack. I'll now use this story as an example: One day, while conducting a class, I had everyone get in a circle, with 1 person in the middle. Random people on the outside, would attack, with an attack of my choice. I would intentionally call out attacks that I knew the middle person, didn't have a preset tech for. More times than not, I'd get the deer in the headlights look, with the student telling me they didn't know what to do.

I'd ask them if they knew how to punch, kick, block, and move, to which they'd say yes. I'd then say, good, then do it! It was nice seeing the 'light' go off. My point of doing this was to show them that they didn't need a preset tech. Recognize whats coming at you, and defend yourself.

How does this relate to what I said above? When I teach, I use the preset techs as a base, but I encourage the students to think on their own. Personally, I dont want to see the preset Kenpo tech. Instead I want to see them defend and counter. If their tech for a punch is nothing more than a block and punch to the face, then so be it. Use your basics to build from. IMO, we shouldn't need to teach a student 100+ techs and make them wait 20yrs before they can defend themselves.

 

[MJS]

This may not make me popular with the Kenpo folks but....

I watched a class and although I do beleive if you actually learn all of that tech you will be a good fighter, and I use to spar an American Kenpo guy who was damn impressive, my overall feeling was you guys over complicate everything. And I do realize that in the tech much of that is not what is going to happen in a real fight but man there is a lot of overkill IMO.

But then I'm an old CMA guy so what do I know.

As a Kenpo guy myself, let me say that I take no offense to anything that you've said. In fact, I've said pretty much the same thing, much to the dismay of other Kenpoists.

I recall a recent discussion. I was talking about a specific tech. The tech was off of a right roundhouse punch. I said that if the badguy throws a left, immediately after the right, to simply use your basics, counter the 2nd attack, and continue on. If my defense was no more than bringing my hand up such as we'd see a boxer do, then so be it. Do something, whatever it may be, as long as you dont get hit.

Wanna know what the other guy said? He seemed to frown upon that, instead suggesting that if the techs were really 'internalized' we should be able to just go right into another preset Kenpo tech. I asked why? Never got an answer.

Lets see....use the K.I.S.S principle (Keep It Short and Simple) or make things overly complicated. Hmmm....I'll take option 1 for $1000 Alex.

 

[MJS]

Well, more techniques certainly is more, though I don't know about better.

Then there is the question of how many techniques are simply variations of other techniques rather than separate techniques themselves. I consider it more important to learn the principle that allows for those variations in individual techniques than it is to learn each specific permutation.

Good point, and I've said the same. Much seems to be redundant. But thats just my observation.

I generally am of the opinion that the basic material in a system needs to have enough techniques that different people can gravitate towards the set that works best for them with the understanding that not all students will make use of all of the techniques. This allows students to realize their own style of fighting within the system.

The mastering of new material is meant to open doors to possibilities that we did not see previously. That can take our minds in directions that we may not have otherwise gone, enriching our own martial journey. Even if we do not adopt those techniques as part of our go-to set.

The human body is capable of a great many things. The more techniques we know, the more we are prepared for what we may eventually face. After all, just because it isn't in my go-to box doesn't mean that it isn't in yours.

And of course, there are limits. More is better, but only up to a point. In short, more to the extent that it is beneficial to a variety of students, but not so much more that the material becomes cumbersome.

Daniel

Good points. IMO though, and this is what I see in Kenpo, is that there seems to be a tech for everything....a tech if the guy is attacking like this, a tech if he's attacking like that, a tech if the guy is standing a certain way, a tech if the sun is shining down at a particular angle on a Monday, before 6pm. LOL. See how that can be redundant?

There are attacks in which I have not seen a preset Kenpo defense for. Example: Knife to the back. So we have an option....crumble and die or use our basics, and come up with something.

IMO, I'd much rather see people thinking on their own, mastering their own responses, on the fly, for a given attack, rather than having to sort thru a ton of specific techs.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Good point, and I've said the same. Much seems to be redundant. But thats just my observation.



Good points. IMO though, and this is what I see in Kenpo, is that there seems to be a tech for everything....a tech if the guy is attacking like this, a tech if he's attacking like that, a tech if the guy is standing a certain way, a tech if the sun is shining down at a particular angle on a Monday, before 6pm. LOL. See how that can be redundant?

There are attacks in which I have not seen a preset Kenpo defense for. Example: Knife to the back. So we have an option....crumble and die or use our basics, and come up with something.

IMO, I'd much rather see people thinking on their own, mastering their own responses, on the fly, for a given attack, rather than having to sort thru a ton of specific techs.

I agree MJS, when I first started tkd everytime we did self defence techs we learnt a new one, 5 different ways to defend against the same thing depending what angle the attacker was standing at, then 5 that would work against a taller opponent and another 5 for if the attacker was a bigger guy etc etc. In fact, in my first 2 years of training I learnt literally hundreds of techs but never worked on the same one more than once and it became quite disheartening as I just felt confused most of the time. Now under my new instructor we still learn heaps of different ones but we get more free time in class to work on self defence and we are encouraged to work with the techs that feel natural for us. I am now at the stage of my training where I know heaps of different self defence stuff but I only practice a small percentage of it and try and become very good at just those few that I know I would actually use.For me its quality over quantity, but the quantity will grow the longer I train.

 

[Chris Parker]

Hi,

Personally, I think it comes down to what you are training for. For example, there are about 1,000 techniques that I know and can teach from our various lineages, as well as other traditions that I have trained in, and they are trained to allow skill sets such as refined targeting, fine motor co-ordination, disciplined training, focus on correct form, and so on. So if you are training for the "art" side of things, looking to perfect physical actions, or correctly express the movements of the system, then the number of techniques isn't really the point. For example, Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu has 24 sword techniques (12 long sword, 7 short sword, and 5 two sword kata), each of which is relatively short and to-the-point, as well as 20 Bojutsu kata, and a short section of Jutte and Jujutsu. Kashima Shinryu, on the other hand, has 6 sections of Kenjutsu, another section of Battojutsu, and then sections on Jujutsu (another 7 sections here), Sojutsu, Naginatajutsu, Kusarigamajutsu, and more.

However, if your aim is more along the lines of self defence, then you don't really want to learn "techniques". In fact, I would say 1 technique in self defence is 1 too many. What is desired here is a set of adaptable principles, or concepts, that can be used in a wide variety of situations, and expressed through whatever "technique" is necessary at the time.

The way I teach is to differentiate between the "martial arts" training, which is technical and precise, but not really good for self defence, and the self defence training, which is principles expressed through the mechanics of the martial art. One has lots of techniques, and takes full advantage of the range of lessons there, and the other has very few, taking full advantage of training methods for the greatest amount of applicability with todays needs.

So, really, what are you training for? Both have their place.

 

[Big Don]

Are we designing a new system? If so, by all means follow the KISS principle, Keep It Simple, Stupid. If not...

 

[searcher]

As both a Kenpoist and a non-kenpo BB I have a mixed answer. I do see where the advantage and disadvantage of having a high number of techniques.

On the Kenpo side, I beleive it was Mr. Parker who stated that, "if a person knows the yellow belt techniques to perfection, then I will give them a BB." So that is 10 techniques to "master." And I beleive that the original EPAK had 24 techniques before there were people asking the what ifs that led to the expansion of the system.

On the non-EPAK side, I used to have a ton of different techniques from the different systems I would teach my students. And in a high stress/reactionary scenario, the students were less than satisfactory. How did I fix it? I reduced down the number of techniques to 14 and have them practice the techniques against the base attack, then against various other attacks. The result was what I now consider to be the "master key" techniques. Do they work 100%? Nope. But they are making the students better in their reaction to different scenarios and I believe it has increased their survivability in an attack scenario. Mix that with reaction drills and hard contact sparring and you get some pretty good students.


This is the best I can do for an answer. I just want my students to be able to react to a situation and come out with minimal damage to themselves.

 

[MJS]

Are we designing a new system? If so, by all means follow the KISS principle, Keep It Simple, Stupid. If not...

Nope, I'm not suggesting that I or anyone else create a new system. If someone feels that more is better, then by all means, have at it. If someone feels that less is better, go that route. You dont need to create a new system to condense things, to simply change the focus of the material.

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Ive always looked at martial arts as something where I will be taught heaps more than I actually need to know and then as I grow in the art I can 'customise' the art to suit me. The art itself has to cover all bases, it has to cater for men, women, big people , small people , aggressive people, non aggressive people etc. A form I learnt once even has a defence against a spear, and it is highly unlikely I will ever be attacked by someone weilding a spear, but all the info is inclusive in the art. I just customise it to suit me.

 

[Flying Crane]

xingyi has 5 in Wuxing but more in 12/10 animals depending on style and like all CMA there are variations but the bottomline in Xingyi in all forms pretty much amounts to...I'm going to hit you...hard. :EG:

Not hit you a lot or several times but once and really really hard :EG:

That's the thing with CMA. When you understand it properly they all teach you to hit really hard.

In White Crane, we hit you really really hard, and once ought to do the job. But if not, we'll just hit you again. Really really hard...

 

[Xue Sheng]

That's the thing with CMA. When you understand it properly they all teach you to hit really hard.

In White Crane, we hit you really really hard, and once ought to do the job. But if not, we'll just hit you again. Really really hard...

True, in Xingyiquan if the first strike does not do it then pummel em' into submission

However the feeling I get from Yang Taijiquan in my lineage is that they are going to play with the aggressor a bit by sticking and following and if the aggressor does not get the hint, thing get broken.

My Sigung loved Qinna :EG:

 

[AidanO]

True, in Xingyiquan if the first strike does not do it then pummel em' into submission

However the feeling I get from Yang Taijiquan in my lineage is that they are going to play with the aggressor a bit by sticking and following and if the aggressor does not get the hint, thing get broken.

My Sigung loved Qinna :EG:

Essentially that comes down in my Yang Taiji lineage. My Sifu loves breaking a persons root and hurling them to the ground. Of course, he also teaches to hit them hard. Usually just after kicking their knee.

But on the topic of this thread. Essentially Taiji has 13 'principles' 8 'energies' and 5 directions. Everything else is just a combination of the above. Of course, we only have 1 empty hand form. It's just rather long. Although, considering the sheer amount of repetitions, there's not that many techniques needed to be learnt.

Also, there is the middle ground of student vs teacher. To learn how to fight using a system isn't a matter of learning lots of techniques. If all you want to do is be effective, you take the path of learn what is useful and discard the rest. If you at some point want to teach, you have to learn everything to a decent level and master those techniques that are best for you. What works best for me, an 88kg 5'10" male is almost definitely not going to work well for my tiny 45-50kg wife.

Does that mean that if we both learnt the same system one of us would be wrong? No, just different techniques to be taught. I am firmly of the belief that forms/kata were originally designed for lineage holders rather than the average student. Essentially as an encyclopedia of the various techniques of the system so they could teach what was best for the individual. (Plus making custom forms for said student, based around their ideal techniques.)

But essentially, do I need 50 different defences against a punch to my head? No, not really. I need about 3. Total. The rest is just icing and for teaching someone who might not work the way I do.

 

[WC_lun]

There's a saying I used to hear in a previous school, and I think it is pretty accurate, "Don't fear the man who trains a thousand techniques once, but the man who trains one technique thousands of times.

Having had to use my martial arts to defend myself, I have come to the conclusion that it is far better to learn the concepts and principles that the techniques are based upon. If you know that, you can flow from one thing to another without worrying about "technique." You don't have to worry about if you are doing "a" technique, for "b" attack. You just look for your markers and react within the framework of your training. Also being a Wing Chun guy, I tend to look at the effeciency of a thing. In my opinion, training a ton of techniques just isn't very effecient.

 

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Parker once said he would rather have 10 techniques he knew inside and out and he could make work most of the time versus 100 techniques you only know.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Essentially that comes down in my Yang Taiji lineage. My Sifu loves breaking a persons root and hurling them to the ground. Of course, he also teaches to hit them hard. Usually just after kicking their knee.

But on the topic of this thread. Essentially Taiji has 13 'principles' 8 'energies' and 5 directions. Everything else is just a combination of the above. Of course, we only have 1 empty hand form. It's just rather long. Although, considering the sheer amount of repetitions, there's not that many techniques needed to be learnt.

Also, there is the middle ground of student vs teacher. To learn how to fight using a system isn't a matter of learning lots of techniques. If all you want to do is be effective, you take the path of learn what is useful and discard the rest. If you at some point want to teach, you have to learn everything to a decent level and master those techniques that are best for you. What works best for me, an 88kg 5'10" male is almost definitely not going to work well for my tiny 45-50kg wife.

Does that mean that if we both learnt the same system one of us would be wrong? No, just different techniques to be taught. I am firmly of the belief that forms/kata were originally designed for lineage holders rather than the average student. Essentially as an encyclopedia of the various techniques of the system so they could teach what was best for the individual. (Plus making custom forms for said student, based around their ideal techniques.)

But essentially, do I need 50 different defences against a punch to my head? No, not really. I need about 3. Total. The rest is just icing and for teaching someone who might not work the way I do.

Tung Ying Chieh lineage has 3 empty hand forms, one long and two fast and one of the fast is heavy with Qinna. And the long form has applications (more than one) for every posture. And the first part of the long form you get 3 of the 13 postures.

But if you understand the 13 postures you can fight rather well

I do have more to say on this but I am in a bit of a hurry and will have more to say later.