Clark Kent
<B>News Bot</B>
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 7,128
- Reaction score
- 6
How about a "stupid techniques" thread?
By Dr. Dave in da house - 02-17-2009 12:11 PM
Originally Posted at: KenpoTalk
====================
Some techniques are blatantly bad. Others might seem cool or OK on the surface, but break simple rules about personal combat. I was talking to a student last night about some of the more ludicrous ones. I love the old manuals and new journals, as they provide some context around architecture and purpose for the techs. But even with that info, some of them are just nonsensical. Others merely violate some of the early good sense that could be used to craft an intelligent physical response.
I offer for discussion: Deflecting Hammer. Where we teach a student to use an upper body tool against a lower body attack; use a short range block against the BG's long range weapon; then counter with an even shorter range weapon as a counter.
Rather than saying "welcome to kenpo; we're going to start by teaching you some rules about closest-unused--part-to-the-attack-defends-the-attack, or most immediate and longest reaching weapon reaches for and penetrates the target, we're gonna get you working on some obscure distancing and coordination issues that might help later, but don't help now".
I think this would have been served better if we taught them to check it off, then counter over the top with a pull-down cross check and punch over the top. Ranges are better accounted for, as are his available weapons.
__________________________________________________ ______
Rules violations. Sample: Never strike into the same zone twice in a row; split height zones whenever possible. Heavenly Ascent, anybody?
Please note: The purpose of this thread is to invite you to survey the system in light of various criteria, and seek the inconsistencies or contradictions. I can make some great arguments about why we should do it anyway. But what I'm interested in accomplishing with tis thread isn't a "bag on kenpo" fest, but rather to get folks to apply their noodles to plausibility issues.
If we're lucky, we might see some old rules crop back up; some old rules stated in new terms; new rules that address old issues, but just never mad it all the way around the block; etc.
Have at you then, by Krom.
D.
Read More...
------------------------------------
KenpoTalk.com Post Bot - Kenpo Feed
By Dr. Dave in da house - 02-17-2009 12:11 PM
Originally Posted at: KenpoTalk
====================
Some techniques are blatantly bad. Others might seem cool or OK on the surface, but break simple rules about personal combat. I was talking to a student last night about some of the more ludicrous ones. I love the old manuals and new journals, as they provide some context around architecture and purpose for the techs. But even with that info, some of them are just nonsensical. Others merely violate some of the early good sense that could be used to craft an intelligent physical response.
I offer for discussion: Deflecting Hammer. Where we teach a student to use an upper body tool against a lower body attack; use a short range block against the BG's long range weapon; then counter with an even shorter range weapon as a counter.
Rather than saying "welcome to kenpo; we're going to start by teaching you some rules about closest-unused--part-to-the-attack-defends-the-attack, or most immediate and longest reaching weapon reaches for and penetrates the target, we're gonna get you working on some obscure distancing and coordination issues that might help later, but don't help now".
I think this would have been served better if we taught them to check it off, then counter over the top with a pull-down cross check and punch over the top. Ranges are better accounted for, as are his available weapons.
__________________________________________________ ______
Rules violations. Sample: Never strike into the same zone twice in a row; split height zones whenever possible. Heavenly Ascent, anybody?
Please note: The purpose of this thread is to invite you to survey the system in light of various criteria, and seek the inconsistencies or contradictions. I can make some great arguments about why we should do it anyway. But what I'm interested in accomplishing with tis thread isn't a "bag on kenpo" fest, but rather to get folks to apply their noodles to plausibility issues.
If we're lucky, we might see some old rules crop back up; some old rules stated in new terms; new rules that address old issues, but just never mad it all the way around the block; etc.
Have at you then, by Krom.
D.
Read More...
------------------------------------
KenpoTalk.com Post Bot - Kenpo Feed
