Many feel that AK has many "holes" or un-addressed situations within....

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

By the way, the first time this issue of grappling came up, I described the use of several techs on the ground. I was told that a) I didn't do that, b) it wouldn't work (though not why), c) yeah, but then if you do that, he can just...

For the sake of the discussion, could you list a tech or two? Maybe if a few techs. were listed, then we could look at them to see what counters, if any, are available from the ground.

Thanks,

Mike

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by Doc
I disagree and find significant balance in all stances. Yes even the cat stance.



I totally agree with that statement.

Somewhere along the line the suggestion I made about a person personalizing THEIR experiences in Kenpo, and to not extrapolate it to all of Kenpo has been ignored. Stop talking about what Kenpo does or does not have, and begin talking about what YOU do or do not know. This is not directed at anyone in particular, but think about it. How can anyone tell me what's missing in my Kenpo? I don't tell people what they don't have. I listen well, ask pertinent questions, and draw reasonable conclusions based on what they have to say. I know for sure, if someone isn't a current student of mine, they have no clue to what I do, how I do it, and what is covered. I bet the same holds true for most teachers who have been around for more than a minute.

Standing in a school with a gi and black belt on doesn't make you anymore a teacher, than standing in a garage wearing coveralls makes you a mechanic.:rofl:

Good point Doc. Unfortuantely, not everybody can train with the top guys or move to the location where they are, so in that case, you're left with whatever it may be that you have. Granted, everybody trains differently, but when you have more than 1 person saying that it lacks ground work, that IMO, says something!

Mike

 

[Kenpo Yahoo]

The neutral bow is the only stance in which you are in a state of balance. You should be striking while moving into the neutral bow or moving out of the neutral bow. When you are not in the neutral bow you are transitioning, which means you are employing one of the three power principles.

I don't think it's the only stance in which you are in a state of balance. You could move from a cat or natural position. These two positions having more to do with your weight distribution and foot location as opposed to whether your heel is up or not, but this is splitting hairs.

In the UKF we believe that all of the stances are as important as the neutral bow. However, you have to execute them properly just like anything else or you will take yourself out of anatomical alignment. I have to assume, based on your statement, that you are not doing this stance or foot maneuver correctly.

I will concede to this, odds are that I may not be doing this right.
I never claimed to be a kenpo master, but I don't think "mastership" is a requisite of common-sense.

When your feet are crossed in a twist stance or crossover, despite how balanced you feel, it is possible for your opponent to lunge forward and knock you over. While some may argue that this is possible regardless of the stance, I say, "why should we help the situation by binding our legs and limiting our mobility.
That's right, while you are generating power through your stance you are also binding your legs with each other. You are now committed to forward movement, twisting out, or if you want you can move backwards against all that force that you just created. Please tell me if I'm wrong. I don't claim to know everything about kenpo, I just have several little things that I've been working on for a while that kinda bug me. This crossover thing is one of them.

Let me ask you this, would you ever do a crossover stance during one of the ram techniques? Why or why not? I sure as heck wouldn't, I don't have enough mass to play that game, especially when the guys I'm working out with are all 6' - 6'5" and 200-260 lbs.

 

[CoolKempoDude]

if any of you here WANTS to learn a REAL kenpo technique, head to 'kenpo general" IMMEDIATELY.

"biting technique" in "new kenpo basic" thread.

you are talking about a technique which will work every time and every place

i guess Mike Tyson is on the ring again

Edit: Why do we need to argue whether AK techniques don't work in particular situation HERE when we simply follow below link to learn more about Kenpo "basic" from another Kenpo fella?



http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11337

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

CoolKempoDude wrote that there are two types of people here: "hole" and "unhole". I think many would put me in a 3rd category: "ahole".

 

[rmcrobertson]

Again:

1) twist stances take you off-line in a different fashion from a step-off;
2) twist stances are useful against an opponent on the ground;
3) twist stances can close off lines of entry in techniques such as Ram and the Eagle.

So...what happens to crossing out, if there're no twist stances?

 

[CoolKempoDude]

Originally posted by Doc
I see some are looking for specific EPAK techniques used on the ground. I don't know about others but, Parker has always had techniques specifically created for the ground that are not a re-working of other techniques in my study. Just as we have continued and created techniques for other areas not addressed in the commercial curriculum, like slashing blades, automatic handguns held "street style," rear arm-bar chokes, blades to the throat while pinned, shotguns and rifles front and rear, etc.

you mean we don't spend as much time to *develop* or *focus on* ground technique as we do in other areas in AK?????

Also, what do you mean "not a re-working of other techniques"?

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka
CoolKempoDude wrote that there are two types of people here: "hole" and "unhole". I think many would put me in a 3rd category: "ahole".

:rofl: You're not an "ahole" OFK. I'm sure people have put me in that category also.

Mike

 

[Michael Billings]

Fellow Kenpoist:

When we discuss "holes" in Kenpo, and specifically in the so called "ground game", I get a little weirded out. I could easily answer charge for charge and word for word what techniques I use or teach on the ground. For example a version of Delayed Sword where the left hand creates a hook in the right arm, the inward handsword is an eye thrust or pressure point above the mandibular, the kick (after the left leg hooks their right, creating and anchor) is a "bump" to roll them so I am in the mount.

** Note: This is a self-defense application against a rapist (in my IDEAL phase), after all, we have to start somewhere.

What I see most of you referring to as "holes" is "how does a Kenpo stand up fighter, survive or beat a BJJ or Shoot Fighter?"

It is a very limited argument based upon the mistaken fact that someone once said "90% of all fights go to the ground." That is a faulty premise to start with, unless you are a law enforcement officer tasked with "restraining" and "arresting" perpetrators. Another exception is if you work in Mental Health and do a lot of restraints (as I did in another lifetime).

My adult and adolescent experience whether working security at concerts or being a bouncer at a bar, outside the context of law enforcement or the hospital, I have had 0% confrontations go to the ground. I just don't usually have the time to argue point for point the way some of you WANT TO, as if somehow this willingness to argue make YOU right.

Why don't you try some of the techniques outside of the context of "playing a ground game" with someone else who has that skill set, put yourself in the place of a woman waking up in the middle of the night with a knife at the front of your throat, or the blade at the side of your neck. What does work for you? My techniques stand me in good stead here, with appropriate modifications given orientation and weapons. Rather than dismiss, try them, see if you can make something work rather than be disparaging about other's mentality toward the ground.

Self-Defense is different from fighting per se, whether on the ground or on your feet. It is different from grappling, although grappling COULD well be a component.

Just my 3 cents worth (inflation you know?)
-Michael

 

[MJS]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Again:

1) twist stances take you off-line in a different fashion from a step-off;

True

2) twist stances are useful against an opponent on the ground;

Can you explain further? Is the opp. on the ground and you standing, or both on the ground?

Mike

 

[MJS]

I dont think that those of us that are advocates of the ground are saying that you should take the fight to the ground. We are instead, saying that in the event that you should find yourself there- IE: tripped, thrown, etc. that you should know what to do. Do 90% of all fights go to the ground? Probably not. Do 0% of them go to the ground? Probably not. There is a time and place for everything, so just because one person has not encountered this, does NOT mean that someone else will have the same outcome. If 2 people are pushing, shoving, grabbing, etc. while standing (standing grappling) whats to say that it wont go down? Predicting the outcome of a situation is impossible. Yes, in the perfect world, we can say, "Well, if I was attacked like this I'd do that, and if I was attacked like that I'd do this!" Like it was said before, that is a pipe dream!

IMO, the idea of the ground, is to get back to your feet as soon as possible. Unless you're entering a MMA fight, who wants to roll for 20min?

Mike

 

[CoolKempoDude]

Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka
CoolKempoDude wrote that there are two types of people here: "hole" and "unhole". I think many would put me in a 3rd category: "ahole".

do not think that way, my friend.

some AK people are mad at hell because you say there are "holes" in AK. It also means what they learned is NO good.

BUT everybody entitles for their own opinion whether other like it or not.

try to be SPECIFIC and more details about 1 particular AK technique which doesn't work in "ground" and i'm sure other will show you their side of story.

in the end, you are in "unhole" category or *these* people are in "hole" category

you are in "hole" catory for NOW

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Thanks CoolKempoDude. I will always be in the "hole" category because I think EVERY system must have holes. Systems were created by people and nobody's perfect.

 

[dcence]

So your advice would be to throw out all the "Ram," techniques altogether? Hm. Interesting, especially since I was chewed out--back about 1996--for not understanding that Charging Ram was essentially to be used when the attacker abruptly went from having his guard up, to dropping low and attempting to take you down, as a wrestler would.

I believe whoever chewed you out should apologize to you, because he or she doesn't understand how a grappler attacks.

Robert, don't read into my post what is not there. I never said throw out the Ram techniques. We in the AKKI teach Ram techniques, but Doc's post illustrates my point. Ram techniques are for tackles, like football players might execute, not for the people who shoot for the legs. Look at Broken Ram and Intercepting Ram. Where is the attacker's height? -- at your legs? No, at your torso. All of the Ram technqiues deal with a tackle to the mid-section, not a single or double leg takedown, which is as basic and natural to grapplers as a punch is to us.

Just think about Charging Ram. The whole premise is moving off the line by moving your rear foot up the circle. Well, you know what? As a wrestler I am shooting for that lead leg, which just sits there like a drumstick on Thanksgiving Day.

Keep the Ram techniques; practice them. But don't think that knowledge will directly translate to a guy who shoots low and then comes up underneath your defense, like a wrestler or BJJ practitioner would.

I am not saying there are holes. I believe wholeheartedly Kenpo has the answers, but only if you actually take your knowledge and practice it in different contexts, in this case of a grappler -- not the football player.

We can either recognize a weakness (which to me is just an opportunity to learn) and make it a strength by addressing it or ignore it and be defeated by it.

Derek

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Runners apply principles of breathing, balance, conditioning, body positioning, pace and timing, etc. Swimmers use the same principles. However, the actual techniques used in swimming are not the same as in running. And, a runner who has never taken a swimming lesson is going to have a pretty hard time applying those principles in the pool.

 

[Karazenpo]

As Mike reiterated and I previously posted, its not neccessarily that you take an opponent to the ground. The point is you may very well find yourself on the ground, again, trip, slip, taken down, an act of God, whatever, it happens and if you prepare for it, it won't freak you out. You will repond properly. I believe in the Military special ops planning they have a term called 'friction'. You make your ideal plan and then list everything that can go wrong or off track and make a plan for that. Sometimes, though, you may want to take an assailant down with you as a single or double leg takedown. This strategy can totally disorientate a good aggressive fighter who wasn't prepared to be taken off his feet like that. To be taken to the ground like this not only can demoralize a good fighter but can stun or knock him out also. I think what we need in discussions like this are those that have more real world street experience. In the martial arts in general, there is too much fighting in theory and that's, imho, not how it works. When we hear comments like, 'I don't go to the ground, so I don't train that way', a flag should go up that tells us the author of such comments has very little if any at all street experience and certainly no reality training. I don't mean to offend anyone but don't you have to agree on that?

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Courtesy or our old friend Clyde T. O'Briant, this topic is now active on the KenpoNet complete with a quote from dcence!

 

[CoolKempoDude]

Originally posted by Old Fat Kenpoka
Courtesy or our old friend Clyde T. O'Briant, this topic is now active on the KenpoNet complete with a quote from dcence!

post link here pls. Easy access.

we can compare the *result* from 2 different places. Awesome

 

[dcence]

Courtesy or our old friend Clyde T. O'Briant, this topic is now active on the KenpoNet complete with a quote from dcence!

Well, I will have to check it out. Nice to know Clyde is still around.

 

[Ceicei]

Originally posted by Doc
I see some are looking for specific EPAK techniques used on the ground. I don't know about others but, Parker has always had techniques specifically created for the ground that are not a re-working of other techniques in my study. Just as we have continued and created techniques for other areas not addressed in the commercial curriculum, like slashing blades, automatic handguns held "street style," rear arm-bar chokes, blades to the throat while pinned, shotguns and rifles front and rear, etc.

So if these are not in the commerical curriculum, when or at what level would these techniques be taught?

- Ceicei