WarriorSage,
It’s a good thing to question the moves inside of the forms. And it’s okay that the downward raking middle knuckle fist, in Short 2, isn’t one of you’re your favorite moves. It’s even okay that you would find it odd (or would even taken aback) for Mr. Parker to purposely include an incorrectly executed move inside his system – if that is, in fact, what he did.
Now, letÂ’s take your question one step at a time and see what we come up with.
You read on a few websites and forums that the downward raking middle knuckle (with the wide kneel) in short two is incorrect . . .
Although you didn’t mention exactly what it is that you think is being done incorrectly, I’ll assume it is the lack of support the middle knuckle has upon making contact with your opponent’s body. This is the most commonly noticed “flaw” (if it is one) in Short Form 2, so let’s start by saying that if the purpose of that move is to teach a student to strike his opponent with a middle knuckle fist (with the fist in a vertical position), yes it is being done incorrectly. This is a no brainer, as anyone can make a middle knuckle fist, push up on the middle knuckle and see that it bends like a willow in the wind.
And, secondly, you ask if Mr. Parker included this move to see if his students were actively investigating the forms.
LetÂ’s break this second question into two pieces. First, was it designed by Mr. Parker, and second did he include it to see if his student were actively investigating the forms.
I donÂ’t think you will get an argument for anyone that the move you are referring to was indeed included in Short Form 2 by Mr. Parker. I have been shown, and taught, this form by many high ranking men, and women, in Kenpo, up to and including Mr. Parker himself, and if you are doing a hammering middle knuckle fist, with the fist in a vertical position, you are doing the form as taught by Mr. Parker.
The big question is; Did Mr. Parker include an incorrectly executed move, in order to see if his students were actively investigating the forms?
The answer is no – Mr. Parker would never include an incorrectly executed move within his system for any reason.
Then if the move was put there by Mr. Parker and the move appears to be done incorrectly, letÂ’s go back to the move itself and consider this; is it possible that what you see is not what you get? In other words are you looking at the middle knuckle or at the hammerfist itÂ’s attached to?
If I were to show you a standard five pound sledge hammer, and say its purpose was to bash stuff, you would likely agree that it’s the right tool for the job. But, if I were to show you a sledge hammer that was shaped like a middle knuckle fist, and say the same thing, you may become distracted by the shape of my hammer and question my skill as a hammer maker. But what if I were to take you aside and tell you not to be distracted by the shape f my hammer, but to imagine yourself smashing and bashing stuff with my rather odd looking sledge hammer – do you think you could look past its shape and appreciate its value as a hammer?
I canÂ’t tell you if Mr. Parker included that move to see if his studentÂ’s were actively investigating the forms, because I donÂ’t know. But if he did, I doubt that he would have wanted them to stop investigating at finding a move that seemed to done incorrectly. I think he would have wanted them to continue with the investigation and try to determine the moves true value.
