Latest TOW, Intellctual Departure

[Touch Of Death]

No, you don't thrust the first block and that's exactly why I asked. If you're doing short 1 wrong you will probably do alot of the yellow/orange technique's wrong.

Yeah right.

 

[Touch Of Death]

So, my point is that "EVERYBODY" thrusts that first inward block, including you."


No, you don't thrust the first block and that's exactly why I asked. If you're doing short 1 wrong you will probably do alot of the yellow/orange technique's wrong.

K12,
I have to ask. Do you start all your techs from a meditating horse or did you just make that statement because you thought it made you sound smart?
Sean

 

[Kenpomachine]

Can we agree on a definition of thrust and hammer so everybody are in the same page? I think there's a misunderstanding of the meaning of these terms, or at least, you don't apply the same meaning to them.

By the way NOT everybody begins short 1 in a meditating horse

 

[kenpo12]

"K12,
I have to ask. Do you start all your techs from a meditating horse or did you just make that statement because you thought it made you sound smart?
Sean"

Thought it made me sound smart but you saw right though it. Darn!

 

[Touch Of Death]

Can we agree on a definition of thrust and hammer so everybody are in the same page? I think there's a misunderstanding of the meaning of these terms, or at least, you don't apply the same meaning to them.

By the way NOT everybody begins short 1 in a meditating horse

This is true. We start from the med horse, some bring there hand back "and" block, in which case it would be a true hammering block; however, there is that "and" again.
Sean

 

[rmcrobertson]

Darn, me post got lost.

A few things.

First off, you could argue that Short 1 begins in an attention stance, as you start the salutation. But if you leave off the salutation, Short 1 starts in a meditating horse stance. Period. Unless, of course, Mr. Parker got in wrong in some way I am unaware of?

Similarly, the first block in Short 1 is a hammering block in which the righthand actually cocks back, or chambers if you prefer. That's the way the form is. Sorry, but to teach it otherwise is to teach it wrong. (Developing something else is another question.)

Next, for beginners, Delayed Sword is taught against a grab FIRST and foremost. (You may indeed add a push or punch attack--later.)

Why? a) Because of the Web of Knowledge; b) to take advantage of the fairly-natural tendency for the hands to move left as left foot steps back; c) to establish a relation to subsequent techniques--take a look at the variants of that initial right block in Alternating Maces, Sword of destruction, Deflecting Hammer, Mace of Aggresion, for example.

Sorry, but the techniques--and the forms--are the ways that they are for some very sound reasons. One can go on about "evolution," vs. "being traditional," forever--but the damn things are the ways they are for reasons.

I'd also be interested to see what folks thought about the Tip...

 

[Touch Of Death]

Darn, me post got lost.

A few things.

First off, you could argue that Short 1 begins in an attention stance, as you start the salutation. But if you leave off the salutation, Short 1 starts in a meditating horse stance. Period. Unless, of course, Mr. Parker got in wrong in some way I am unaware of?

Similarly, the first block in Short 1 is a hammering block in which the righthand actually cocks back, or chambers if you prefer. That's the way the form is. Sorry, but to teach it otherwise is to teach it wrong. (Developing something else is another question.)

Next, for beginners, Delayed Sword is taught against a grab FIRST and foremost. (You may indeed add a push or punch attack--later.)

Why? a) Because of the Web of Knowledge; b) to take advantage of the fairly-natural tendency for the hands to move left as left foot steps back; c) to establish a relation to subsequent techniques--take a look at the variants of that initial right block in Alternating Maces, Sword of destruction, Deflecting Hammer, Mace of Aggresion, for example.

Sorry, but the techniques--and the forms--are the ways that they are for some very sound reasons. One can go on about "evolution," vs. "being traditional," forever--but the damn things are the ways they are for reasons.

I'd also be interested to see what folks thought about the Tip...

well obviously its one of those catagory completion techs. For just a moment you not only turn your back to your opponent, but in this case you bring your feet toguether. The danger of performing the tech aside, I have no complaints. getting back to what you said about doing short form one wrong, If eliminating and and wasted motion from your art is wrong then God bless "wrong". My point being the performance of your art should match your principles and rhetoric. Why teach point of origin and then violate it right out of the gate?
Sean

 

[rmcrobertson]

Uh...it's not wasted motion, for all sorts of reasons. Please check "Infinite Insights," in which Mr. Parker chambers the right hand before blocking.

Second, Delayed Sword doesn't complete a category. It starts one, which is why it's best probably to teach a fairly-rigid version of the technique first.

Third...does a reverse bow really mean turning one's back in the usual sense?

Incidentally, "Intellctual," ain't spelled like that, O God of String Titles.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Uh...it's not wasted motion, for all sorts of reasons. Please check "Infinite Insights," in which Mr. Parker chambers the right hand before blocking.

Second, Delayed Sword doesn't complete a category. It starts one, which is why it's best probably to teach a fairly-rigid version of the technique first.

Third...does a reverse bow really mean turning one's back in the usual sense?

Incidentally, "Intellctual," ain't spelled like that, O God of String Titles.

I thought we weren't correcting spelling erros there professor. I know I mispelled it from viewing it last night. By catagory completion, I was refering to ID.
Sean

 

[kenpo12]

QUOTE] have no complaints. getting back to what you said about doing short form one wrong, If eliminating and and wasted motion from your art is wrong then God bless "wrong".[/QUOTE]

It's not wasting motion, there are a miriad of reasons for chambering the block, several of which Robert already described above. I'm not saying you can't practice the technique with a punch instead of the grab and use a thrusting block. But the ideal technique is the ideal technique and if you change it you're doing something different.

 

[dcence]

"Maybe I wasn't clear. If you do that first hammering block out of a meditating horse, the hammer part of the block is not there to do. Hammering blocks start with the fist at the same shoulder, if your already half way there (meditating horse), then you just graft a thrust the rest of the way to the target. So, my point is that "EVERYBODY" thrusts that first inward block, including you."


No, you don't thrust the first block and that's exactly why I asked. If you're doing short 1 wrong you will probably do alot of the yellow/orange technique's wrong.

Ah, -- you neither thrust or hammer. Your hand is already out there. All you do is step back and rotate your body, maybe rotate the arm a little. The first inward block in Short or Long 1 is a positional block.

Just wanted to make sure we had three entirely different opinions out there.

Derek

 

[rmcrobertson]

Mr. Ence:

Sorry, no. Again, please look at "Infinite Insights," where the form is demonstrated. Then too, a bunch of us got--let's just say fully informed--last night. By the same guy who did the Tip.

I'd also argue that the question of hammering/thrusting is different from the issue of positional, riding, etc. checks. Hammering/thrusting has to do with method; positional, riding, etc. have to do with effects. Similarly, blocks and checks are different, though blocks should (as you noted) have a checking effect.

Thanks for the point,
Robert

 

[Touch Of Death]

Ah, -- you neither thrust or hammer. Your hand is already out there. All you do is step back and rotate your body, maybe rotate the arm a little. The first inward block in Short or Long 1 is a positional block.

Just wanted to make sure we had three entirely different opinions out there.

Derek

Yes and no. Your muscles thrust on that positional block.
Sean

 

[MJS]

Depending on your school. Delayed Sword was first taught to me as a step through straight punch.

Thats right. I learned it both ways. You should be able to take parts from any tech. and blend them, regardless of what the attack is.

Mike

 

[MJS]

NO, not depending on your school, depending on your head or chief instructor. This is how Kenpo gets distorted and bastardized, and where people feel there are voids to fill because they didn't get the information to begin with. Can we all say NATURE OF THE ATTACK!!!!!!

Dark Lord

Dude, do you honestly think that EVERY Kenpo Inst. teaches EVERY tech the same way?? Come on man. I spent 2 hrs. talking to Clyde and I was totally amazed as to the differences that we both have. Same art, different thoughts. Didnt Parker himself make changes?? Of course he did. You can have Tatum, Mills, Chapel, Palanzo, and Palanas all do the same tech, and I'd be very surprised if there were no differences. Come on!!

Mike

 

[kenpo12]

You should be able to take parts from any tech. and blend them, regardless of what the attack is.

But not with the ideal stage.

 

[dcence]

Mr. Ence:

Sorry, no. Again, please look at "Infinite Insights," where the form is demonstrated. Then too, a bunch of us got--let's just say fully informed--last night. By the same guy who did the Tip.

I'd also argue that the question of hammering/thrusting is different from the issue of positional, riding, etc. checks. Hammering/thrusting has to do with method; positional, riding, etc. have to do with effects. Similarly, blocks and checks are different, though blocks should (as you noted) have a checking effect.

Thanks for the point,
Robert

Robert, Robert, Robert...

My point is that there are many ways to do the same thing. I know what's in the infinite insights, you don't have to quote chapter and verse. Do you sign as pictured in the Infinite Insights (right-left)? Some say it is wrong, some say it is right. What say you?

Derek

 

[dcence]

Yes and no. Your muscles thrust on that positional block.
Sean

Especially if you look at the right hand moving from attention to meditating to step back/block. I don't bring the hand back either. To have the hand out, then bring it back to the hip, only to return it to that position is excessive. But if someone wants to bring it to the hip and block out again, I am not going to worry about it either.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Derek, Derek, Derek.

Nobody said anything about chambering at the hip.

And no, I don't think they all teach the same material. That's half our damn problem.

More to the point, we aren't talking about some advanced brown knife technique here; we aren't talking about some extension; we aren't talking about interpretations of moves in Long 6. And we aren't talking, at the moment, about advanced students.

We're discussing Short 1 and Delayed Sword, fer crissake. Basic and fundamental material.

I see that AGAIN, everything gets distorted into platitudes about grafting or about differences, and claims that this is all a matter of traditional stuck-in-the-mudism vs. evolutionary adventure. Nope, not at all.

One sign of the problem: can anybody who argues for teaching DS against a straight right punch right at the outset, to a beginner, clearly explain:

a) their reasons for violating the whole idea of the Web of Knowledge;
b) their reasons for omitting the clear and simple, immediate lesson in checking that the defense against a grab provides;
c) their reasons for making it harder for a beginner to understand a kenpo fundamental--drop in your stance;
d) their reasons for changing a sequence of learning attacks with this tech that would more-naturally go from grab to push to punch;
e) their reasons for changing a clear, plain opportunity to show a tyro that the grabbing hand is not the real threat;
f) their reasons for omitting a bit of the foundation on which the concept of mirroring is to be built;
g) their reason for creating a duplication of attacks, since Sword of Destruction and Attacking Mace both go against punches;
h) their reasons for disconnecting Short 1 from this technique.

Don't tell me I'm a traditionalist. Avoid rattling on about differences. Just explain your reasons for the changes, in real detail, without cliches.

Looking forward to it.

 

[dcence]

Derek, Derek, Derek.

Nobody said anything about chambering at the hip.

And no, I don't think they all teach the same material. That's half our damn problem.

More to the point, we aren't talking about some advanced brown knife technique here; we aren't talking about some extension; we aren't talking about interpretations of moves in Long 6. And we aren't talking, at the moment, about advanced students.

We're discussing Short 1 and Delayed Sword, fer crissake. Basic and fundamental material.

I see that AGAIN, everything gets distorted into platitudes about grafting or about differences, and claims that this is all a matter of traditional stuck-in-the-mudism vs. evolutionary adventure. Nope, not at all.

One sign of the problem: can anybody who argues for teaching DS against a straight right punch right at the outset, to a beginner, clearly explain:

a) their reasons for violating the whole idea of the Web of Knowledge;
b) their reasons for omitting the clear and simple, immediate lesson in checking that the defense against a grab provides;
c) their reasons for making it harder for a beginner to understand a kenpo fundamental--drop in your stance;
d) their reasons for changing a sequence of learning attacks with this tech that would more-naturally go from grab to push to punch;
e) their reasons for changing a clear, plain opportunity to show a tyro that the grabbing hand is not the real threat;
f) their reasons for omitting a bit of the foundation on which the concept of mirroring is to be built;
g) their reason for creating a duplication of attacks, since Sword of Destruction and Attacking Mace both go against punches;
h) their reasons for disconnecting Short 1 from this technique.

Don't tell me I'm a traditionalist. Avoid rattling on about differences. Just explain your reasons for the changes, in real detail, without cliches.

Looking forward to it.

First, there is nothing wrong teaching it and doing it by the book.

However, I do not first teach Delayed Sword against a grab for two reasons, which I believe have more merit than your list:

(1) You cannot distinguish a grab from a strike until contact, at which point it is too late to decide, especially if the grab turns out to be a strike. A push, palm heel and a grab all look the same as they come at you. I believe it is important for beginners to learn first, solutions that work for all three problems, then teach them variations that are more situationally specific. Teach general rule, then variations and exceptions relating to specifics.

(2) It is more important to learn to first deal with an attacker as he enters your within contact range, than after he has made contact. This is the priority when actually defending yourself. I do believe it is important to train for a grab that has been applied, but not first, because it establishes the mind-set in order of reversed priorities.

But I learned "old school" and I think (or at least hope) I turned out alright.

Good discussion (too bad it is totally off the original subject).

Derek