Short Form 1

[Touch Of Death]

The way I teach+practice this form at the moment is to use a transitional forward-bow between neutral-bows whenever we step back. So the order would be:

1. Step back with left foot to a foward bow, chamber right fist (above shoulder height) for a hammering inward block
2. Pivot to right-neutral blow with a right inward-block, chambering the left fist at the side of the chest.
3. Leaving the blocking arm in position, Pivot back to a right-transitional-forward-bow
4. Step back with right foot to a left transitional-forward-bow, chambering the left arm for an inward-block.
5. Pivot to a left-neutral-bow with a left inward-block, chambering the right fist at the side of the chest.

And so on...(note I typed this out quick hope I didn't miss anything)

In makes execution of the form alot easier, and teaching it to beginners is easier also (although it takes longer)...their forms look so much sharper and more powerful with the extra transitions when compared to stepping 'straight back' to those neutral bow's.

This begs the question; do you ever practice short one for stepping off the line of attack? this would require stability sooner making the transitional bow a bit slow. Just a thought.
Sean

 

[JamesB]

This begs the question; do you ever practice short one for stepping off the line of attack? this would require stability sooner making the transitional bow a bit slow. Just a thought.
Sean

I think you're referring to 'stepping off' as something other than the covers that are built into the form (i.e. when you would change direction to face 3/9/6/12 o'clock)... in that case no, I personally don't practice this way. I treat the form as a solo practice to develop the body mechanics which would enable me to transition between stances whilst at the same time executing defensive blocks (strikes). I don't attempt to read anything more into the form in terms of motion / alternate striking options, but then that's just the way I approach it at the moment.

My understanding would be that stepping off the line-of-attack would require more specific footwork and I wouldn't like to guess what this might be at this time.. but I would argue that using forward-bows in the form, whilst initially slower to learn and execute, ultimately results in faster transitions and a more effective/stable technique?

 

[Doc]

Nearly James,
Thinking about the footwork only, from a ready position,
1. step back with your left foot into a transitional forward bow.
2. turn your right foot to make a forward bow,
3. turn your left foot to make a neutral bow.

Reverse this to step back into a left neutral bow.

Hope that makes sense.

Also, some points that are generally overlooked is the positioning of the feet, upper and lower platforms (no twisting at the waist) and shoulders in alignment. I tend to find a good teaching tool is to get the students to freeze when you say and then go round and check them.

Just remember "Everything matters!" - you'll be hearing that a lot next time you're down.

Of course after your next grading, it's infinitly more specific than this!! But that fun is yet to come!

 

[Doc]

yes it's my understanding that the 'back elbow' is just a what-if / motion concept. It could be there, but the form should not be trained that way as the chambering of the fist is designed to support your body-structure and block.



We chamber our hands/arm at the side of our chest rather than hips, for all our basics/forms/sets etc, and whenever appropriate within a technique.

In my experience, there is a noticable difference in the strength of the blocking arm if the opposing arm is not correctly chambered. The fist should be chambered at the side of the chest rather than the waist - with the fist facing upwards, and the forearm parallel to the floor. If the arm is not chambered this way the blocking/striking arm will not be as effective, at least in my experience. It is quite simple to verify this by testing the strength of the blocking arm (get someone else to do it) - and experimenting with the chambered arm in different positions. I've found that chambering at the side of the chest stablises the upper body and is significantly stronger (and therefore more effective I'd argue) than not doing it this way.

I'd be interested in hearing about any mechanisms that could be used (aside from slapchecking/BAMing) which might counter the loss of structure by not chambering the arms..

james

James, in that form the hand does go to the Hip Index. However if the hand is closed, how can it be a strike?

 

[MJS]

I'd suspect that the notion of a "back elbow strike" is modern attempt of sorts to insert application to the cocking of the hand at the hips. We all know that this is a classical motion, and certainly there's nothing wrong with seeing it as a rear elbow, but I'd imagine the form was done in that manner to meet the standards of classical "kata" and not intended as a strike. But its a good way to describe it to a beginner, no doubt.

I think you're correct. Of course, if we look at some translations to other forms/kata out there, the act of pulling the hand back to the hips could signify pulling someones arm while you counter strike with the other hand.

In our group, we do not cock the hand back in application, consequently we do not do so in training, This includes our forms. We operate from a standard positioning of the arms which I won't go into at this time, but suffice it to say the arm positioning is the same in our forms as it is in application. If one's kenpo does is not taught from a common construct from which all the motions of the arms originate, then I believe the hips are a good frame of reference for the learning student. But its important for us to recognize this disparity between application and training, unless of course, the hand is actually cocked at the hips in a fight.

If you don't mind going into some detail, I'd be interested in hearing about the way you position the arms.

Mike

 

[JamesB]

James, in that form the hand does go to the Hip Index. However if the hand is closed, how can it be a strike?

ok that's interesting, I definitely didn't imagine that it would be like that. From my simple tests chambering at the chest had quite a difference compared to chambering that the hip (when testing inward+outward extended blocks). I honestly can't see the reason for doing it that way but then there's so many mechanisms/reasons for doing things which I just don't comprehend....do you have a simple explanation for contrasting the circumstances under which you'd choose to chamber at either the hip/chest? i.e. maybe a general action which had just taken place, or was about to happen?

I recall Mr Mills talking about hand open vs closed for striking (in this context) so I'm with you on that..I think! Funny how simple it seems once someone explains it well

 

[Touch Of Death]

I think you're referring to 'stepping off' as something other than the covers that are built into the form (i.e. when you would change direction to face 3/9/6/12 o'clock)... in that case no, I personally don't practice this way. I treat the form as a solo practice to develop the body mechanics which would enable me to transition between stances whilst at the same time executing defensive blocks (strikes). I don't attempt to read anything more into the form in terms of motion / alternate striking options, but then that's just the way I approach it at the moment.

My understanding would be that stepping off the line-of-attack would require more specific footwork and I wouldn't like to guess what this might be at this time.. but I would argue that using forward-bows in the form, whilst initially slower to learn and execute, ultimately results in faster transitions and a more effective/stable technique?

Is not Short one a mass attack preparation form? I don't think it is reading into a form to explore mass attack options on "THE" base form.
Sean

 

[Doc]

ok that's interesting, I definitely didn't imagine that it would be like that. From my simple tests chambering at the chest had quite a difference compared to chambering that the hip (when testing inward+outward extended blocks). I honestly can't see the reason for doing it that way but then there's so many mechanisms/reasons for doing things which I just don't comprehend....do you have a simple explanation for contrasting the circumstances under which you'd choose to chamber at either the hip/chest? i.e. maybe a general action which had just taken place, or was about to happen?

I recall Mr Mills talking about hand open vs closed for striking (in this context) so I'm with you on that..I think! Funny how simple it seems once someone explains it well

When you execute the form as it was designed (by Mr. Parker) and include all the mechnisms, then you will recognize that the Indexes translate into Intersecting Circles. On one level the Intersecting Circles translate into Double Blocks. They are also the root movement of your basic AOD execution mechanisms, your trapping mechanisms, counter seize mechanism, and seize takedown, etc depending on the size, timing and execution of those Intersecting Circle Mechanisms.

 

[lenatoi]

What does AOD stand for?:idunno:

 

[Doc]

What does AOD stand for?:idunno:

in SL-4 Kenpo, Anticipated Offense & Defense. They are the bridge between forms, sets, and self defense techniques that may be expressed as exercise drills, and/or expeditious technques within themselves that answer questions not found in curriculum defined default self-defense techniques.

 

[bujuts]

If you don't mind going into some detail, I'd be interested in hearing about the way you position the arms.
Mike

Rather than trying to explain it, what I did is a search through some posts that have been made on the same subject.

[FONT=Verdana, Times New Roman, Helvetica]The objective of twelve points is to establish a basis of domination of the three dimensions within the parameters of the Outer Rim. The creation of the twelve points parallels (and was inspired by) efforts in modern physics to discover a unified theory that ties all forces of the universe together. As such, twelve points is not only an origin, but a starting, ending, and transitioning position. You will see in Mr. Pick's techniques motions are in, out, and through the twelve point positions - thus "tying" together all strikes, blocks, etc, within the techniques. This dynamic process is referred to as Variable Expansion, which I think of as twelve points in motion.
[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Times New Roman, Helvetica] In considering the importance of twelve points it might be thought of in this way. The neutral bow is the king of all stances. We in the UKF consider it to be our primary weapon. We constantly move from the neutral bow to the neutral bow. If the neutral bow is incorrect, deterioration of engagement compounds through transition diminishing power transfer and effectiveness. Therefore it is imperative that the neutral bow be correct in order to provide the mass the correct anatomical alignment to effectively engage in three dimensions. Twelve points then can be considered the neutral bow of the hands. Correctly positioned it defines the outer rim. It places your upper body weapons in correct anatomical alignment as the domination process of both your outer rim and your enemies outer rim unfolds to spinal ring penetration.[/FONT]

I[FONT=Verdana, Times New Roman, Helvetica]f from a horse stance you position the arms at bracing angles (i.e. the angle of the inward block) outlining the Outer Rim, step back to a neutral bow, drop the rear elbow down by a fist or two, now you've got four points of consideration in each of the three physical dimensions (the fists and elbows each at distinct locations in the width zone, in the depth zone, and in the heighth zone). 12 Points gets its name simply from this - 4 Points of Consideration/Dimension x 3 Dimensions = 12 Points of Consideration.

The two-dimensional image of the outer rim is formed by your articulating centers (shoulders and hips), centered at the solar plexus, and completed by two circles passing from the solar plexus through these articulating centers. Refer to http://www.ukfkenpo.com/pg/uni_dia.html. The Outer Rim is completed by expanding this image into the depth zone by your arm's length. Now you have a three dimensional space that you completely dominate through your motions in kenpo. 12 Points, then, is a reference point; in all regards, you dominate this space, all three physical dimensions of the Outer Rim. We perform the techniques from, to, and through a Twelve Point Position. We do not stray beyond the Outer Rim, we do not chamber or cock the hand, and we do not allow the outer rim to be collapsed on us. Play with it, and you'll find there's a wealth of information in it.

The Sets are the basis from which the student learns to dominate this space, and all of them operate from, to, and through 12 Points. They are, to us, more than an exercise or drill. The are the building blocks of all that comes later. First comes Block Set. What Block Set does not address in regards to targets and paths of action, Strike Set addresses. What Block Set and Strike Set together do not address in regards to targets and paths of action, Elbow Set addresses. What those three do not address...Finger Set addresses. And so on, ending up with Sticky Hands and the more sophisticated (and yet very basic) motions with the blade.

So, in a nutshell, this forms the students' introduction to kenpo, together with the processes of mental engagement, the three fundamental power sources, the Four Rings to illustrate the idea of personal space, and the stances - the king of which is of course the neutral bow. Delayed Sword is the first forum on which one learns to apply this idea of 12 Points and Domination of the Outer Rim, but Delayed Sword, and any technique for that matter, is not the primary consideration for the student, but is the stage on which we apply the principles learned through this cohesive matrix I have described above. To bring it full circle to the original post, Spontaneity is developed through learning how to 1) accelerate the body through the stances in any / all directions as required, and 2) to freely flow through the domination of this Outer Rim, to select the motions that achieve the desired result on the enemy(s).

Without understanding it, one may think Mr. Pick is off his rocker coming up with this stuff. It appears too complicated, too off the wall. The truth is it is incredibly simplifying. It is as if we are the monkeys in the tree, and the techniques are the reflection of the moon in the water. We bicker over this lunar reflection and that lunar reflection. To this monkey anyway, this notion of a cohesive matrix within kenpo is atleast a turning of my head toward the moon itself. My primate brain may not yet grasp it all, but I am pleased I am not being asked to look at the water. You start to learn from 12 Points and it opens up doors like you never thought possible.

One of the things Mr. Pick told me about Ed Parker was that the SGM was incessantly innovative, constantly refining, constantly improving, and that he died with much of the music still in him. I think one of the most important things Mr. Pick gleaned from his teacher was this spirit of relentless innovation. This platform of 12 Points is but one of his own contributions to kenpo based on his understanding (he'll tell you his own limited understanding) of this craft we all share.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Times New Roman, Helvetica]For Reference, look at Mr. Pick in this picture: http://www.ukfkenpo.com/gallery/seminars/031904/pages/031904-005.htm
Note the orientation of his arms specifically, not that of Mr. Idol and Mr. Higgins (meaning them no disrespect, mind you). This is where we opate from. If his right hand were throwing an inward block, you'd have our Delayed Sword (and every spinoff thereof, Attacking Mace, Dance of Death, etc.). If his right hand were turned to deliver a hammerfist to the neck, you'd have our first strike in Five Swords after the block. If his right hand were throwing an extended outward block, you'd have our Sword of Destruction. If his right hand were throwing a downward block, you'd have our Deflecting Hammer. So on and so on. Incidentally, we train to keep the hands closed (but not necessarily clenched) unless we specifically need them open to form a particular weapon.

Also, put a knife in the reverse-grip his right hand (or left, for that matter), and you see how our empty-hand kenpo translates directly into the knife, also shown here: http://www.ukfkenpo.com/gallery/seminars/061705/pages/061705-03.htm
Notice that here, Mr. B still has (in context of his own outer rim) four different points in his width zone (two elbows, two hands), four different points in his height zone, and four different points in his depth zone - literally 12 Points.

Finally, to put it in context of this thread, this 12 Points position is how you'll see us working Short Set 1, instead of chambering the hand at the hips.

Hope that helps.

Steven Brown
UKF
[/FONT]

 

[MJS]

Thanks for taking the time to post this! It answered my questions and the pics. were a big plus too!:ultracool

Mike

 

[JamesB]

Is not Short one a mass attack preparation form? I don't think it is reading into a form to explore mass attack options on "THE" base form.
Sean

I can only speak for myself, but I don't view the forms this way - however this is probably a reflection on where I am in my learning so far.
I simply see short#1 (and long#1) a tools to develop correct body mechanics. I recognise that many people may view these forms differently and they're entitled to interpret them any way they wish - after all that is one of the core principles behind AK is it not? Personally though I prefer to 'keep it simple' as there seems to be a never-ending complexity to even this (apparently) simple form (see Doc's comments in this thread) and moving beyond this before I've even started to _really_ learn short#1 is unwarranted imho.

 

[JamesB]

When you execute the form as it was designed (by Mr. Parker) and include all the mechnisms, then you will recognize that the Indexes translate into Intersecting Circles. On one level the Intersecting Circles translate into Double Blocks. They are also the root movement of your basic AOD execution mechanisms, your trapping mechanisms, counter seize mechanism, and seize takedown, etc depending on the size, timing and execution of those Intersecting Circle Mechanisms.

Well I can kind of put this into context enough to appreciate what you're saying...but I think I better learn short#1 before attempting to go any further

 

[Doc]

Well I can kind of put this into context enough to appreciate what you're saying...but I think I better learn short#1 before attempting to go any further

Your assessment regarding body mechanics is correct. It is the first form and is designed to introduce and reinforce basics and teach skills that have significate applications as you move through the curriculum. It includes the fundamentals of stances, (horse, transitional forward bow, rear bow, neutral bow, head and foot Indexing), defensive footwork, (PAM, step through, Indexing, outside angle and reverse cover) defensive blocking (double block), seize extrication, counterseize takedowns, defensive breaking, BAM,s, AOD mechanisms (offensive muscle reassignment, never cavity access, offensive weapon disconnect) and defensive breathing as a start. Everyone of these mechanisms is used by the time you finish the 102 (orange) course.

Good work James.

 

[Touch Of Death]

I can only speak for myself, but I don't view the forms this way - however this is probably a reflection on where I am in my learning so far.
I simply see short#1 (and long#1) a tools to develop correct body mechanics. I recognise that many people may view these forms differently and they're entitled to interpret them any way they wish - after all that is one of the core principles behind AK is it not? Personally though I prefer to 'keep it simple' as there seems to be a never-ending complexity to even this (apparently) simple form (see Doc's comments in this thread) and moving beyond this before I've even started to _really_ learn short#1 is unwarranted imho.

Now I feel like a hardstylist defending an ancient form and its true meaning, but I contend that adding transitional bows may look cool but is too slow for the a mass attack situation. If seperating combat affectiveness from a form makes you a more effective martial artist then I guess you know what your doing.
Sean

 

[Doc]

Now I feel like a hardstylist defending an ancient form and its true meaning, but I contend that adding transitional bows may look cool but is too slow for the a mass attack situation. If seperating combat affectiveness from a form makes you a more effective martial artist then I guess you know what your doing.
Sean

So you're saying that the first form you learn should teach you how to defend against a mass attack, but it doesn't contain any offensive movements. I guess that's one perspective, however I thought it was supposed to teach you basic footwork and blocking applications, as the very first form with 'mass attack' being far from what you should be doing or thinking about.

 

[Sam]

I am confused on the main post. Repeat on opposite side? You DID both sides...?

 

[MJS]

I am confused on the main post. Repeat on opposite side? You DID both sides...?

Repeat on opposite side= The mirror image of the first way you did the form. The 2nd side would start with stepping back with your right foot and delivering a left inward block.

Mike

 

[Sam]

1. Drop your left foot back to 6 :00, into a right neutral bow while simultaneously delivering a right inward block and a left back elbow strike.
2. Drop your right foot back to 6 :00, into a left neutral bow while simultaneously delivering a left inward block and a right back elbow strike.

Isn't that doing both sides?

Also, what are all these elbow strikes? this is CRAZY-different from the version I was taught.