SKK Problem Techniques

[JTKenpo]

I am reading these posts and seeing some people's belts getting a little tight. I am glad some of you made nice on PM's but lets remember these are forums and no one wants to get together in August if anyone thinks they need to prove something. I put on the list for one thing that we should go over at our get together - #43-- also i know what is coming next, and i do not know what is the best time to get together.. it may not be until after the summer from what some people are saying to me in emails.

I will happily reiterate that I have no issue with anyone on this board near or far that goes beyond occasional disagreements and specifically Marlon clarified what he was saying and that is good enough for me...

I think 43 is an interesting discussion and work out. The spins in your technique sound some what like what I have for 49 (I think its 49). left hammer to wrist with right knife to bicep to block then right back fist, left palm to face spin under the attacking arm with right elbow to ribs and execute right hip throw. The finish is a little silly with flowing punches to backfists while attacker is on the ground.

Jesse are there any dates floating about yet?

 

[KENPOJOE]

Kenpojoe,
i think that i have always demonstrates and stated that i have a high regard for your knowledge and all the work you do teaching. I have not seen said video and was responding to a comment made by someone who apparently had seen it. I in no way disparage your teaching ability. I assumed that in the video you demonstrated the technique in the ideal phase 'only' and did not discuss or demonstrate more because (as someone else said) it was more of a historical document). My 'unfortunately' comment is about some schools that never go beyond the ideal phase , i do not include you in this category in the least. I remember being hit by you once in a discussion of ...i do not remember what...so i kow something of your power. Please remember, everyone who knows me, who i am and do not take somethings wriiten here out of context of who i am. It is difficult to take the time to writethings out in such a manner that no one is offended and that everything it COULD mean is clearly addrssed. I hope you get to read this Kenp[ojoe or the others who informed you of things said previously let you know of this post as well. Once again for the record, i respect your knowledge and i believe you to be a skilled teacher. nor have i ever seen that video...BTW i still have and use the dvd i have from you on honsuki and await the nexty one which i have emailed you about. you are a source i respect sir!!

marlon

Hi folks!
Dear Marlon,
Thank you for the phone call on sunday! I'm glad we could clear this up and as you could tell from my reaction over the phone, It was no big deal! I haven't been on Martial Talk in awhile [got the "We miss you" email from Martialtalk to substanciate that!]. The only reason I even knew about this post was because 4 different people from different parts of the country called me about it! Glad to have this all cleared up! BTW, I've had fun with Marlon the times we've met and he's a real nice guy! I take no personal umburage regarding your post and glad we got a chance to chat! it's been ages since we chatted last!!!
BEGOOD,
KENPOJOE

 

[DavidCC]

Hi KenpoJoe, I just want to re-iterate that I do fully understand why you made that video that way; and it did exactly meet that goal! I look forward to seeing more karazenpo video.

-David

 

[marlon]

I cannot stand 43. I have gone and tried 3 different versions and they were all bad. My original stays on your feet and keeps spinning and somehow you end up behind them,, which does not make sense unless you are not hitting them. Demasco's version i believe jumps in the air during the spins and strikes at a downward angle. I learned another version from a 6th dan out of TokyoJoe's and it is nothing even close to ours. I liked it but then realized that everything after 40 in the tokyojoe's system was made up by someone else and not done the Villari way.

although 43 is not my favorite i do find it workable. there is a great deal of footwork involved to do so...which begs the question why do so much footwork....
resepectfully,
Marlon

 

[RevIV]

although 43 is not my favorite i do find it workable. there is a great deal of footwork involved to do so...which begs the question why do so much footwork....
resepectfully,
Marlon

do you end up in front of the person at the end of the technique # 43 or behind them? As taught to me I end up behind them which does not work for me when i actually hit the person. JTKenpo I do my #49 off of the left punch, blocking to the outside of the arm, step in right double palms, LT to ribs, RT to face, Left upward ridge to throat, step behind with left foot, hip throw and the flowy and thing at the end like you said.

 

[JTKenpo]

do you end up in front of the person at the end of the technique # 43 or behind them? As taught to me I end up behind them which does not work for me when i actually hit the person. JTKenpo I do my #49 off of the left punch, blocking to the outside of the arm, step in right double palms, LT to ribs, RT to face, Left upward ridge to throat, step behind with left foot, hip throw and the flowy and thing at the end like you said.

Sorry I forgot that the 40's are taught lefty. I always require students know their #'d combos left and right so it never made sense to me to teach the 40's (or remember that they were taught) lefty. The block to the outside of the arm is definately different though.

 

[14 Kempo]

Sorry I forgot that the 40's are taught lefty. I always require students know their #'d combos left and right so it never made sense to me to teach the 40's (or remember that they were taught) lefty. The block to the outside of the arm is definately different though.

If you noticed, or maybe it's just in my style, the upper 40s are not just left handed, they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.

We, too, do all techniques right and left handed. In the past, we were asked at brown to black belt to do all techniques left handed. In my new school, I ask my students at all levels to do their previous rank material left handed as they learn their current material right handed.

 

[DavidCC]

We, too, do all techniques right and left handed. In the past, we were asked at brown to black belt to do all techniques left handed. In my new school, I ask my students at all levels to do their previous rank material left handed as they learn their current material right handed.

Our requirement is that we work the material 2 belts below you on the left side.

But I would rather just have techniques that address left punches directly instead of making them a special case of a right punch defense.

 

[14 Kempo]

Our requirement is that we work the material 2 belts below you on the left side.

But I would rather just have techniques that address left punches directly instead of making them a special case of a right punch defense.

... and thus the upper 40s, you in a right handed stance, them in a left stance, punching left handed. I agree.

 

[marlon]

do you end up in front of the person at the end of the technique # 43 or behind them? As taught to me I end up behind them which does not work for me when i actually hit the person. JTKenpo I do my #49 off of the left punch, blocking to the outside of the arm, step in right double palms, LT to ribs, RT to face, Left upward ridge to throat, step behind with left foot, hip throw and the flowy and thing at the end like you said.

with the sequence of high -low strikes as Shihan taught me i do end up behind the person even when i hit them...however the footwork to do so is a bit onerus. My 49 starts like 18 in that i move to a catstance at 4:30 with a lt downward palm block and a rt tiger mouth tothe throat...step in with the rt leg with double downward blocks to the head then left elbow to the head and rt ridge to the temple lt crane strike to the neck hook it and sweep the back leg with my left pivot cw with a spinning axe kick to back of the head....love it!!

marlon

 

[Jdokan]

they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.


Do people practice ALL their techniques (combo's) against both open & closed stances?? We were never taught this...we did lefty/righty for each....It wasn't until I broke away on my own that we started doing the open/closed stance work.....Something I find that really ensures you must be open to adaptation....What was the line Clint used: adapt, improvise, overcome...

 

[14 Kempo]

they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.


Do people practice ALL their techniques (combo's) against both open & closed stances?? We were never taught this...we did lefty/righty for each....It wasn't until I broke away on my own that we started doing the open/closed stance work.....Something I find that really ensures you must be open to adaptation....What was the line Clint used: adapt, improvise, overcome...

I try to do so, not always however. We try to do all our techniques both right and left handed, also at three levels, beginner, imtermediate and advanced. Beginner: block then strike. Intermediate: block and strike simultaneously. Advanced: forget the block, hit 'em. We find some don't work all the various ways and yet others need to be reverse engineered, so that blocking is applied. Working open and closed stances can make a major difference on many of our techniques as it will change the leg positiion and therefore eliminate various sweeps, leg hocks and leg checks. Now that you bring it up, I need to work this aspect uch more.

 

[JTKenpo]

If you noticed, or maybe it's just in my style, the upper 40s are not just left handed, they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.

We, too, do all techniques right and left handed. In the past, we were asked at brown to black belt to do all techniques left handed. In my new school, I ask my students at all levels to do their previous rank material left handed as they learn their current material right handed.

Just to clarify, I encourage my under brown students to try the techniques opposite side, it is required at brown belt level. By open stance I believe you mean that the strike more resembles a boxers cross, am I understanding that correctly?

 

[JTKenpo]

Our requirement is that we work the material 2 belts below you on the left side.

But I would rather just have techniques that address left punches directly instead of making them a special case of a right punch defense.

I don't see it as a special case of a right punch, but that your goal should to become ambidexturous (I know that must be spelled wrong). Because the majority of people are right handed the dominant time in training would be to start with the right side but when you become more fluint you would want to consentrate on the opposite side as well. This point is actually were I personally find fault in the AK system as techniques are taught against precise attacks. Now that isn't to say that these techniques can't be used against various attacks (hey isn't there a thread about this) but they are taught against specific attacks. Where in sk we say here is the lowest common denominator now go have fun exploring.

 

[marlon]

they are against an open stance, rather than the rest that are all against a closed stance.


Do people practice ALL their techniques (combo's) against both open & closed stances?? We were never taught this...we did lefty/righty for each....It wasn't until I broke away on my own that we started doing the open/closed stance work.....Something I find that really ensures you must be open to adaptation....What was the line Clint used: adapt, improvise, overcome...

could you clarify what you mean by open and closed stances?

marlon

 

[14 Kempo]

Just to clarify, I encourage my under brown students to try the techniques opposite side, it is required at brown belt level. By open stance I believe you mean that the strike more resembles a boxers cross, am I understanding that correctly?

Yes, that is one way to look at it.

An open stance is that one fighter is in a right fighting stance, left foot forward, the other fighter is in a left fighting stance, their right foot forward. So the left side of one fighter is nearest the right side of the other fighter.

A closed stance, both fighters are in a right stance, or both fighters are in a left stance. Both fighters have their left foot forward, or both fighters have their right foot forward.

Does that make sense?

In our style, combos in the high forties are done from an open stance.

 

[DavidCC]

I don't see it as a special case of a right punch, but that your goal should to become ambidexturous (I know that must be spelled wrong). Because the majority of people are right handed the dominant time in training would be to start with the right side but when you become more fluint you would want to consentrate on the opposite side as well. This point is actually were I personally find fault in the AK system as techniques are taught against precise attacks. Now that isn't to say that these techniques can't be used against various attacks (hey isn't there a thread about this) but they are taught against specific attacks. Where in sk we say here is the lowest common denominator now go have fun exploring.

In AK, at least according to the people I have learned from, the training of techniques agaisnt specific un-varying attacks is only the earliest stage of learning.

The process of training the left side and right side, internally in the brain, does not indicate that there is any efficiency in learning the mirror-image of a series of movements. That is, if you can do combo X on the right, you cannot expect there to be any shorter learning curve to learn X on the left. In fact it could take longer if you are right-handed to learn the lefty technique.

My thoughts on this are that I am a right-hand dominant person (like most people) so what do I have to gain from trying to make my left as dextrous as my right? (Other than preparing for the unlikely case that my right will be disabled when I need it) So why should I be switching to my least-capable mode (left-dominant) in response to a left punch or kick? I think it makes a lot more sense to learn right-dominant responses to attacks from either side, from any angle.

Ironically "Go Have Fun Exploring" is actually one of my main complaints about SKK! yes that is necessary at some point but I want to be taught things that I could not discover on my own.

 

[JTKenpo]

In AK, at least according to the people I have learned from, the training of techniques agaisnt specific un-varying attacks is only the earliest stage of learning.

The process of training the left side and right side, internally in the brain, does not indicate that there is any efficiency in learning the mirror-image of a series of movements. That is, if you can do combo X on the right, you cannot expect there to be any shorter learning curve to learn X on the left. In fact it could take longer if you are right-handed to learn the lefty technique.

My thoughts on this are that I am a right-hand dominant person (like most people) so what do I have to gain from trying to make my left as dextrous as my right? (Other than preparing for the unlikely case that my right will be disabled when I need it) So why should I be switching to my least-capable mode (left-dominant) in response to a left punch or kick? I think it makes a lot more sense to learn right-dominant responses to attacks from either side, from any angle.

Ironically "Go Have Fun Exploring" is actually one of my main complaints about SKK! yes that is necessary at some point but I want to be taught things that I could not discover on my own.

....and now we are right back to the original meaning of the thread about skk combos and various attacks. We were trying to explore the standard combo against a different attack i.e. #2 proper against a left punch, now you have your right dominant side against a left punch and all you have to do is vary the targets ever so slightly and it all works....but wait didn't you also complain that there shouldn't be techniques that were one hand dominant.....also training your opposite side starts the process of learning about opposites and reverses....and if you have trained in AK then you DO have right dominant defenses against left hand attacks...???


Don't take this as an attack David its just hard to see where you are coming from at times

 

[RevIV]

with the sequence of high -low strikes as Shihan taught me i do end up behind the person even when i hit them...however the footwork to do so is a bit onerus. My 49 starts like 18 in that i move to a catstance at 4:30 with a lt downward palm block and a rt tiger mouth tothe throat...step in with the rt leg with double downward blocks to the head then left elbow to the head and rt ridge to the temple lt crane strike to the neck hook it and sweep the back leg with my left pivot cw with a spinning axe kick to back of the head....love it!!

marlon

thats different, Did he make that up or is it how he was taught - The version i do is taught the same by Jim Bryant, Bob Nohelty, Demasco - and i know they were pretty high up when they left Villari -- or is this one of the cases that involves the 12 rings of Villari Combo's? heehee

 

[RevIV]

Yes, that is one way to look at it.

An open stance is that one fighter is in a right fighting stance, left foot forward, the other fighter is in a left fighting stance, their right foot forward. So the left side of one fighter is nearest the right side of the other fighter.

A closed stance, both fighters are in a right stance, or both fighters are in a left stance. Both fighters have their left foot forward, or both fighters have their right foot forward.

Does that make sense?

In our style, combos in the high forties are done from an open stance.

Your left / rights confused me. A right figthing stance the way i was taught meant right foot forwards, Left would be left forward, but thank you for clarifying that.