Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Actually, TOD, the particular approach to Locking Horns that we were discussing teaches something other than strikes. Beyond joking, I was responding to the claim that there isn't any grappling, and ground work, or even any responses to the attacks of grapplers of various sorts.
Further, what I wrote didn't have anything to do with learning or not learning judo. It had to do with the repeated claim that none of the stuff I've worked over years is in kenpo. It had to do with the repeated claim that Mr. Parker left kenpo somehow deeply flawed, incomplete, full of vulnerabilities, and that the way to handle this was to go learn all the other arts in which kenpo was deficient. I reject these claims, on grounds I've previously stated.
And none of those have to do with the assumption that I'm anything vaguely resembling god's gift to martial arts, or that my kenpo is perfect, or anything resembling such claims. In fact, I have repeatedly stated that I'm not even remotely interested in becoming a "fighter," in the UFC sense, or the "streetfighter," sense, which seems to be primarily what is being advanced as the motivation behind "evolving," kenpo.
What I'd ask is this: how's your kenpo going? Are you familiar with all the sets, the forms, the extensions on the techniques? Have you extensively worked their applications? For how long? Under what teachers? And I don't mean a seminar or two or a camp, but over years? I mean, if it's reasonable to keep advancing this demand that I and others go study jiu-jitsu, or judo, or shootfighting, or whatever, on the grounds that kenpo doesn't offer any of this stuff--isn't it reasonable to ask the other side of the question?
And where does this search through 'em all end?
Now let me be clear. I've no idea what you know or don't know. I've no idea how much you've worked through. I've no idea whether it's a good idea or a bad idea for you to study whatever. I'm simply arguing that for me, it's pointless to go from style to style when I don't even really know this one, after a mere eleven or twelve years. And, to be sure, I'm arguing that in the end, if you look, you will find what you went elsewhere for right back home in kenpo.
I presume that you're simply referring to James' pragmatism. Well, my version of pragmatism is that it's better to take the time to really learn one strong system than it is to go from system to system to system. I suppose that for others, this may be a pragmatic choice--but this is not reasonably grounded on the inadequacies of kenpo. It's based on what you want, how much time and energy you have available, your ambitions as a martial artist, etc. And--for about the hundredth time!--that's fine. Great, in fact.
I do not see, however, this has to be based on the supposed inadequacies of kenpo. Why not just say, "I want to do this other stuff?"
Or if not that, then why the need to expose all these so-called blind spots, and the absolute refusal to believe those of us who keep saying, "Yeah, worked that," without--at least in my case--without claiming to be some sort of invincible ground-fighter all ready for the UFC?
Come on, guys. Those of us on these forums have about as much chance of competing on a professional level as the man in the moon. That isn't a reflection necessarily on what we study, or even how we study--it's just a recognition of reality.
In brief, this: some of the stuff that's being blamed on kenpo is the product of a) our (I repeat, OUR, not your) lack of imagination and hard work, b) the limits of what we can do as martial artists (which are never where we think they are), c) a demand that kenpo be aimed at goals (like pro fighting) that were never the point, d) lousy teaching, e) (a repeat of "a") our unwillingness to put in the sweat time.
Let me write it again. I think it's great that some folks go study all this stuff. Good for you. I just don't find the same problems in my training, and I don't care to go gadding from school to school, which is what I'd (repeat, I'd) be doing. I simply want to understand what I'm working on now.
Oh yeah...not in response to the last poster at all, but one more time: this isn't a simple matter of "tradition," vs. "evolution."
Thanks.