Sword and hammer pt. 1 and 2

[Chris Parker]

Ha, just to clarify, those questions, while hopefully self evident and largely rhetorical, were aimed at Ras, rather than yourself, Cyriacus... hence the "using your post as a jumping off point"....

 

[Cyriacus]

Ha, just to clarify, those questions, while hopefully self evident and largely rhetorical, were aimed at Ras, rather than yourself, Cyriacus... hence the "using your post as a jumping off point"....

I know - Hence all the Ahas. In hindsight, they are completely unnecessary, and trimming would have been better. In fact...
*fixed

 

[MJS]

I see what you mean there, FC, but what I'm saying is a bit different. As I understand it, a TECH is a SINGLE manuever. A guard sweep. The guard tech in any of its various manifestations. And yes I read nad like Pek Choi/Chuin Choi example. As SEQUENCE, as I understand it, are LINKED TECHS in a compound manuever or flow that has a specific aim. The Bridge and Roll for escaping the mount, for instance.

What I'm saying is...learn the Bridge and Roll really well. Then apply it standing up. When the Bridge and Roll is applied standing up, you know what they call it?

The Hip Heist.

Now if you know bjj and wrestling well? You can recognize those techs immediately, and not be fooled by the labels of each tech...but automatically absorb the application of each tech.

When I made that connection, I also applied it to another staple tech and now we have The Standing Gator Roll [ ends in a sleeper hold standing or a standing tie up as you escape the bear hug, shot, grab,etc ]. Plenty helpful in multifights that have become grapplefests and you might need to elude BGs while using somebody as a shield or finishing somebody. It's a shocker in the MT Clinch. Lolol and everybody falls for it.

Now. Once you really have the tech and every tech of a sequence like my version of Sword and Hammer? You can do it in most any unarmed combat scenario. Clinch, Ground, Striking range? No problem. If I put a knife or stick in my hands? No problem still doing the whole thing. I can do it with a gun too [ as long as my opponent is within arm's reach or blitz reach ] and so can any of you. All you have to do is train. None of the techs that I show in my Sword and Hammer Radius R.D.L. sequence is new...but my Sword and Hammer Radius R.D.L. IS DESIGNED to be applicable in multiple situations. I got there by...applying the a functional but more traditional expression of S&H to multiple scenarios. I added the specifc components in my expression [ R. D. L.= Rock, Drop and Lock ] as a matter of personal preference but let me ask you...

is not pinning your opponent's hand to your shoulder "locking" him in place? Further, if you handsword over his pinned hand and his extended grabbing arm while rotating your right pec into his arm and pulling back with your left shoulder...are you not simultaneously applying a brief armlock and strike [ with the lock possibly hyperextending the elbow and/or wrist ] ? yes, that is a "Lock".If you do such a thing...would you likely "Drop" him?

Yes, you probably would.

Well whaddya know. R.D.L. Rock, Drop and Lock.

The difference is that I made my moves more functional and more evidently what they are. The subtle lock/strikes come in the sash ranks of my Gym. Not the belt or pre-White belt ranks. And the other difference is that I see and know that I can R.D.L. a guy with a slight modification of the more common less functional Sword and Hammer...but not as well as it can be done with my version.

That's another big advantage that being multiFACETED and VERSATILE gives us. I'm not saying that nobody but me is multifaceted and versatile, what I AM saying is that the concerns commonly raised about such an endeavor are simply not true.

Now as for the multiple techs in a Kenpo sequence? I used to ask that question too. Why hit this guy with a gajillion techs? That's immoral, overkill, wasted energy, and likely illegal.

Well, after I started sparring with and functionalizing the techs? The answer came: these sequences simultaneously resolve single and multifight scenarios. Mr. Parker and Mestre Bimba knew that their students might have to face more than one attacker at a time when their students only knew one sequence, so they made sure that their one sequence and most of their other sequences could stand up to that reality. It's my understanding that multifights were common in the Hawaii of Mr. Parker's youth...and we--Flying Crane and I--have long known that multifights were common for capoeiristas.

My particular sequences serve the same purpose aaaand they can be used with minimal changes whether armed with knife stick or gun [ in h2h range] as well as used in many grappling situations.

Gtg but I'll be back later...

I still say that instead of trying to make a 1 size fits all model, we should address each thing as it was designed to be. Let me ask you this...why do we see pro fighters have multiple trainers? One for strength and conditioning, one for boxing skills, another for ground skills, and so forth.

As for the mult. attack situation...yup, certainly valid, but again, it seems to me, like way too much is being thrown at the student in too quick a fashion. IIRC, I started a thread on the Kenpo multi man attacks. FWIW, I'm not that impressed with them, but, they do give the student what the other techs do...a platform to build from. We want to talk about practicality, and functional things...well, I can come up with many more practical and functional ways to address multi man stuff, than what we see in the preset techs.

 

[MJS]

The problem with the above is that there is no "scripted scenario"...that whole misunderstanding is the result of too many BBs screwing up BR and mistaking loose guidelines and suggestions for THE WAY. Each scenario is supposed to be crafted by each teacher while preserving a primary lesson of each tech as loosely guided by Big Red.

Now, I've never read Big Red in my life, and never heard of it until Doc brought it up. Clearly I don't have on hand that written material. I can probably Google it, and I can pretty accurately guess at some of them but...having the BR notes would be cool too.

I've done more than fairly well on my own, though.

My scripted scenario for Sword and Hammer is to initially deal with a surprise attack in the form of The Hockey Punch from whatever quadrant and whatever position, that didn't kill or KO or disable you outright. So we're starting from the standing unarmed surprise Hockey Punch and progressing to the armed multifight Hockey Punch vs single and multiple defenders whether grounded or not. Then we apply those lessons to all of the primary ranges of h2h SD and guess what? It WORKS. Very easily too, I might add.

Hmmm. Maybe I shouldn't be championing this approach so much. That way, my team and I will still have a humongous advantage over people who don't use this training model, and we'll keep whomping most of em in tournies and on the street. Hmmm...lololol.

LMFAO!! Brutha Ras, you can't be totally serious here. The way I view it...(and man, this is starting to sound like discussion with Jason Brinn...lol) we need both scripted and non scripted. The scripted stuff are the techs that are taught, you know, the list of 24/belt that're taught in 99.9% of the Kenpo schools out there. Like I've been saying for the past...gee, I lost track...lol...we use those as a platform to build from. THEN, we move to the non scripted techs. As I've taught...start with the base Lone Kimono. Drill that endlessly, gradually building up to a more aggressive, forceful attack. Finally, you add in a grab and punch, more movement, pushing, pulling, etc.

You're right...people who dont train like this will most likely be in for a surprise, because they'll probably only be used to the basic move. But I still stand firm in my belief that cramming tons of stuff down their throat at a rapid pace, is doing more harm than good. If it was that easy, then most students would only need to spend a month at a dojo, then they'd be able to go into the real world and be the next Superman...LOL.

 

[MJS]

traditionally in the Chinese arts not everyone got taught everything, and not everyone got taught to the same depth and thoroughness. There is definitely a difference between being a student vs being a disciple, and even at the level of disciple there is another level of being an "in-door disciple". That last group are the few individuals who have been accepted and chosen, and who have agreed to become the next generation of leaders in the art, who learn the complete method. They carry the responsibility of making sure the art in its complete form survives, even tho the students who were not disciples and have not learned the complete art can be teachers and teach to their own level of knowledge and skill.

The difference is that in this scenario, typically the non-disciple students are still taught the same system, with the same progression, just not as deep and not all of it. There is not a separate, possibly "inferior" method that is taught to them.

In my own situation, I am the one student in the group, and the other four are all disciples who have been with Sifu for several decades, vs. me coming up on three years. At this point in my training, I have no need to be a disciple because I have a ways to go before I exhaust what Sifu is willing to teach to someone at my level as a student. When and if the circumstances arise, I hope to have the opportunity to become a disciple and learn the complete system. We'll see, when the time comes. But in the meantime, I train alongside the disciples, and there are no secrets that I am aware of. They have material that I have not yet learned, but I do not see any secret, hush-hush discussions going on that are designed to keep me in the dark. Of course they also train on other nights when I am not there, so I have no idea what goes on at those times, nor what kinds of discussions happen when they take Sifu out for lunch after class is finished.

My point in all this is simply that in the traditional Chinese approach to this, while the disciples get the complete system and the students do not get the complete system, what the students get is not watered-down nor inferior. They get the same, only not as much and not with as much depth. But that stuff, even tho not the complete system, is still extremely functional and honestly is all that most people would ever need, if properly understood and developed. Sifu keeps saying that it all comes back to the basics, and the advanced material is simply designed to reinforce the lessons that are held in the basics. If you had the vision to completely understand the basics, you would not need to learn the advanced material. The advanced material just gives more examples, to lead us back to a deeper understanding of how the basics contain it all.

Good points Mike. And you're right....anyone who is just more than a 'student' for lack of better words, will most likely get more knowledge, more secrets, etc. I'm in no way claiming to be all of what you describe above, but I feel that I've developed a more personal relatioship with a few of my teachers. Many times, we'll cover things that usually aren't taught or part of the regular required curriculum.

Do we know that is what happened? I'll bet if you asked them, none would agree to this. I'll bet they all believed that they were getting the "goods". Was there some level of dishonesty or deception that was deemed necessary, in order to get the business model up and running? Did this play on the egos of those who wanted the rank and were given it, without the disclosure that they were missing key components of the education? I dunno. But I find it difficult to blame those students who were given rank and given the go-ahead to be "teachers", but were not properly trained, or were trained in a deliberately inferior product. They are simply doing as they were told and encouraged to do. If this lead to a breakdown of quality, or the propagation of a whole branch of the system that is inherently inferior, then I say the fault lies on the shoulders of the one who set them up.

Haven't a clue, but thats the impression I've got from some posts I've read of Docs. And you're right...none would probably agree.

 

[MJS]

I'm going to reply to a few segments of this post between Ras and Chris. My replies will have a * at the beginning and end, to make it easier..I think, as to who's saying what.




Right. Ras, try to listen here.



Ras, to be completely blunt, this is the core of your problems, and the absolute evidence that you are not in any way right. In the slightest. Let's demonstrate, as you seem rather ignorant of what, or even how a technique teaches it's lessons.

The lessons of EPAK Sword and Hammer are numerous, but some that are immediately apparent are as follows:
- When grabbed, capture the grabbing hand for psychological and physical control.

Grabbing the BG's hand doesn't give you psychological or physical control. He grabbed you in order to control you by locking you down into place for, pushing you away from, or pulling you in to the incoming blows that he's raining on you. Using your far hand to pin BG's hand to your shoulder simply means that you're unwise enough to remove your unencumbered limb from combat, thus opening up other lanes for the BG to attack and hurt you [ or his friends to do the same ] and removing your limb from the possibility of offensive strikes.

*I disagree Ras. It does give a psychological/physical control. The common response from the defender would be to try to pull away, not marry the badguys hands to your body. Its just like a weapon...the badguy is using that weapon for intimidation and control. Not saying that he wouldn't use it, but he's expecting compliance, not grabbing the weapon.*

- When being pulled, go with the energy of that pull.

Most of the more common Sword and Hammer sequences that I've seen live as well as those on YT do NOT feature an actual pull by uke. Most have him posing and doing nothing. But even if they did feature the pull? They neglect to address the very high probability that the BG's punch is hard on the heels of the pull, so they'll be pulled into the oncoming punch in far too many cases. The "more common" Sword and Hammer version that you claim is superior to mine doesn't remotely address this reality.

*Ras, you keep harping on this, and frankly its kinda old. Of course you don't see this in those techs. Why? Because once again, its a platform to build from. Your method is taking the student from step 1 to 10, without hitting 2 thru 9. You make it seem like you're the only one to address a punch. You're not. I do it, just not as rapidly as you're doing it.*

- The use of pre-emptive striking as a tactic.

As I have previously stated and left links proving to be true...Kenpo Elders like Larry Tatum and Doc Chapel find the "pre-emptive strike" notion to be questionable at best. On the mat? Their skepticism is thoroughly underscored by actually sparring with Sword and Hammer vs the Hockey Punch.

* And thats their opinion. The use of a pre-emptive strike is very useful. Theres nothing 'questionable' about it at all. Numerous RBSD guys use it and speak of its effectiveness. The #1 reason people 'question' its use, is because to the average Joe passerby, it'll look like WE are making the first move. What the untrained person IS NOT seeing, is the agressive, threatening actions, by the badguy. THAT right there, is assault. Sorry, but anyone who would wait for the punch to be half way to their face before reacting, well, they're an idiot. As I've said a million times, and I'll say it a million more....my safety, and that of anyone with me is my #1 concern! I'll deal with the other BS later. *

 

[ATACX GYM]

Ill passively disagree.
I say passively, because Im not disagreeing so much with the principle, than with its applicability here.

My friend Cyriacus, I'm going to have to actively disagree with you here. I've spent years applying this tech vs resistance in the dojo, portions of it in the street and the full sequence in a multifloor riot with hundreds of people in the midst of a couple hundred rival gang members going at each other and anyone else at the Queen Mary circa 2006. I appreciate your opinions and your evenly paced, reasonable tone of your posts thus far...but really gentlemen. A simple application of my Sword and Hammer variant vs actual resistance would establish its superiority by far over the more common version. As I've stated before when I agreed with Twin Fist...the more common Sword and Hammer does have applicability but almost 100% of that applicability is in the 'best case scenario'. Doc Chapel went into chapter and verse explaining how this misapplication and misunderstanding occurred, and was emphatic in his repeated statements that the sequences "as written are unworkable" because they were supposed to be "loose guidelines" not rigid inflexible presentations of The Way. Chris Parker chooses to completely ignore the fact that Doc Chapel has annihilated his position by drawing upon the words of the creator of the style that Chris does NOT study; Ed Parker trained Doc privately and personally for about 3 decades. I know of no one else who can make such a claim.

Doc and I have had our disagreements in the past, but those disagreements don't center on matters of history which Doc was uniquely placed to both watch unfold and was the only one uniquely placed in a position very near many of the main authors of action [ himself being a major major catalyst in Kenpo history ] during times when most of us weren't even born.

So anytime Chris refers to the original Sword and Hammer of a art he doesn't study and has zero expertise in, and has the interesting perspective of ignoring this board's most senior and decorated words when ONLY that senior was there and only that senior--Doc-- could deliver first hand info about its creation and direct info as to the position of the founder of the art on this matter. Doc stated emphatically that "there IS NO IDEAL TECHNIQUE" and "the techniques are unworkable" ...and I concur. Where Chris disagrees? He's absolutely factually wrong. He's wrong about the Sword and Hammer in every detail. Proven by the writings of the creator of the art, and reaffirmed by the most senior friend, training partner and confidante of the creator on this board. And to prove that Chris can and does get even MORE wrong than that? He's never sparred with this sequence with any kind of consistency or vs any kind of resistance because he's not a Kenpo man. He's in a position more preposterous than say...an amoeba trying to give a tiger hunting lessons.

Disadvantage:
Assuming You are smaller, weaker, and slower; The biggest issue becomes reach. The Solution as I see it is to Infight, or Kick. Your Tactic ought be different, but the entire structure doesnt need to be debased in order to do one of those to simple things. Theoretically a Takedown could work, but Ill let a BJJ or Judo guy speak for that. That said, Youre already accommodating for a Disadvantage in that Youre assuming Youre being hit before You can defend.


Okay, I'm 5'7" and 156 pounds. I'm a judo bb, a Functional Hapkido 5th dan, a bjj blue belt, wrestling asst. coach, and MT coach in addition to my other ranks. I know a little something about grappling guys bigger than me...and that includes Antonio McKee and the guys who roll with him like King Mo Lawal, and numerous other guys. I've been onthe mat doing randori live against Heyward Nishioka and his crew and more than held my own. I've been on the mat with Wander Braga and Paulo Guillobel, Francisco Bueno and many others.

I only bring this up to point out to you that I fully qualify and then some visavis the "BJJ or Judo" guys that you speak of...and my Hapkido wrestling muay thai and capoeira knowledge gives me perspectives that frequently are more inclusive than those of the aforementioned worthies. The solution isn't to "infight or kick" per se [ although grappling IS a valuable aspect of infighting, so you can do both just by grappling ] and I do Infight with my techs when I'm turned into the punch, and I'm still very close quarters [ which is also a form of infighting ] when I pivot outside of the grab and apply my tech. So we agree there. I apply the knee from infighting as we're too close for kicks. It's not just a theory that a takedown would work...I've done it plenty in the R.D.L. Same with throws. We agree there. You will see that I feature these techs in my Sword and Hammer pt. 3 and alot more in pt. 4.

Now...here's something that members of the relatively rare "fighting" Kenpo dojos [ and Hapkido dojangs and a few Taekwondo dojangs to be honest, not to mention a gajillion old skool hardcore old skool Japanese and Okinawan karate schools ] will instantly recognize and acknowledge: the sequence depicted as the more common version of Sword and Hammer is covered at White Belt [ in my Gym it doesn't even rank as high as White Belt ] when you're doing your techs to the cardinal directions. Seriously. There is no genuine difference between the White Belt Cardinal Directions Drill and the Sword and Hammer sequence as presented by most people's videos. Not even the addition of a guy touching your shoulder is new because oftentimes your training partner is holding a airshield or mitt and places his/her palm on your shoulder with his/her free hand while you handsword the mitt he/she is holding in the opposite hand, then you fire the hammerfist at the groin but stop the hammerfist just shy of contact...and cover out.

Look at the videos. It's rare that uke shows any kineticism beyond a shoulder touch and a fist cocked back [ a fist deliberately and helpfully cocked far enough back to allow unencumbered entry to the throat for the handsword ]. At almost no time does anyone get pulled or pushed or anything else. Uke just lays his hand like a dead starfish on your shoulder, cocks back his fist, poses...and you handsword and hammerfist him for it.

Chris' assertion that adding pushes pulls and other strikes to the Sword and Hammer sequence is changing the sequence from Sword and Hammer is wholly and entirely false. Doc explained in depth and detail that there IS NO STANDARD I.P. and that each instructor has the right to develope their own Ideal for their own Gyms as long as they express their techs following The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique PROCESS. Therefore again..as a matter of fact that cannot be counterpointed validly factually or in any way truthfully [ however rigorously the untruth is championed ] everything that comes from the keyboards of my detractors are wrong the split second that they accept the flawed premise that there IS NO IDEAL TECHNIQUE...and build their arguments upon that false, misguided notion.

Mine is the only version which features being locked in place and hit, being pushed and hit, being pulled and hit, shown from different angles, the common sense to cover up, the inside and outside spin...the works that a dynamic fighting environment would require. Ignore all of everybody's posts--mine, Chris', whoever's--and simply look at the videos. The more common version is static, antiseptic...no blows thrown. Mine is alive fluid interactive...blows thrown, reacted to, and smartly defeated with the use of Sword and Hammer.

Multiple Attacker Fight Scenarios:
This is all the more reason to use one or two rapid blows, followed by an idiopathic Power Strike. This one alone is the main reason Im even replying. This method allows You to easily shift between Opponents, rather than becoming too fixated in an exchange with one, instead nullifying that one.


The scenario that we're dealing with is essentially The Hockey Punch. You're already hit by surprise first. Therefore the first order of importance is to negate further offensives while reorienting yourself and counterattacking as fast and sensibly as possible...while using the Sword and Hammer. The one or two rapid blows concept I subscribe to but only to an extent, and that subscription is mine is shown throughout the sequence of my gym's expression. If you'll look to my video with an eye toward the question you asked, you'll note that my whole Sword and Hammer sequence is a linkage of fight ending blows that can be ramped up or downgraded to match the level of threat posed throughout the confrontation. Even the Sword and hammer that I apply after the cover and spin to the arm not only fully disengages the grip, but the trauma of a genuine stank-nasty combo hammerfist and swordhand to those targets on the arm is frequently in and of itself sufficient to halt further offensives.

So we agree to an extent there.

But I recognize that there are many instances wherein the idea of finishing an assailant with one or two blows is simply not realisitic...the size and weight and strength disadvantage may be too severe. Like a 4'11" 105 lb. woman fighting a 300 lb. man is NOT going to finish him with 1-2 well placed blows right off top in the great majority of instances. Also...experienced martial artists and fighters will concur with the fact that we may have to flurry or move,jockey and strike to put ourselves in a position to launch those fight ending blows. We may miss, our opponent may block our strikes, our opponent's friends may jump in at any point...and any combo of the above factors and others may happen at any time [ depending upon the circumstances ].

So I built a tech that would address all of that in a single flow.

Note how the traditional variant--which was never never never supposed to be a combat model [ what does it say about my detractors when they were/are still duped into believing a specific noncombat teaching example has combat viability when even the man who wrote it specifically wrote it for non-combat purposes? ], and which was always always merely a LOOSE guideline that was HUGELY misinterpreted by subsequent BBs--has no form of answer for this. It's not supposed to have an answer for this. It presupposes perpetual, pinpoint perfect blows and perpetual, perfectly preemptive reflexes and a situation that allows all of the foregoing to shine unencumbered.

Grappling:
Grappling has its disadvantages, like forcing the Grabber to stay in Striking Range whether They like it or not. Plus, either side may stop 'Grappling' at any moment, and as such it is a gamble to 'Grapple' with someone, as oppose to using Grappling as a...
Well, theres a better word for this. "Gap Bridging Tool".

Grappling also has huge advantages in that the overwhelming majority of people have no response to a competent grappling attack. Furthermore, forcing the Grabber to stay in striking range via grappling can exponentially amplify the advantages that the skilled grappler and striker has over his opponent. And yes, Grappling can be used to "bridge the gap".

Armed Assailants:
So someones punched You in the back of the Head... Instead of just stabbing You in a way You pretty much cant Defend if Youre not aware of the attack? Im not disagreeing with this one, so much as calling it irrelevant.
But for the sake of discussion, lets make it a blunt instrument, and presume the blunt forced trauma to the head hasnt incapacitated You. Your Tactics hardly change. In fact, getting closer becomes an even better idea.

I already stated that as a premise to this attack you're not being Ginsu'd to pieces but I've read plenty of reports and personally experienced twice the phenomenon of being cut or stabbed and not knowing it until well after the scrap is over. For the sake of this scenario, I have assumed that whatever weapon being employed is a bodily weapon or a blunt instrument, not an edged weapon or firearm...but any weapon deployed in this scenario can be handled by this response if you're fast enough. The only absolute mandate is that you'd have to respond before the firearm goes off to max your chances of deploying this tech. But once you get to the weapon hand or outside of his grabbing arm? You can decimate the guy with the gun who's grabbing you from The Hockey Punch position too. You just have faaarrr less room for error, of course, and you must deploy every tech with intent to kill or severely injure.

Remember, we haven't gotten into the plethora of throws locks etc that you can use from here. Those techs would seriously come in handy if you're trying to amp your chances of surviving a bladed or firearm attack from The Hockey Punch range. But the best way to deal with all of that is simply to not be there in the first place...

Defensive BG:
This is pretty much a "They are ******" Scenario.
If You begin a Counter-Offense, and They go Full Defense, it can be very easy to overwhelm someone, either by breaking down their wrists, or just hitting anything remotely exposed, or hitting them in the head regardless, since the force travels through, albeit reduced; But permitting further shots to be executed. Im agreeing with this one, but not in the way You intended.

There is a very great amount of power generated within a very small space when one uses the Kenpo Body Whip aka Kinetic Wave. A single blow CAN end things, and even if it doesn't? Any decently clean shot WILL HURT out of all proportion to its appearance.

Flowing Seamlessly:
That I can agree with, which is why I dont think a Scripted Defense should be any longer than 1-2 Motions, as oppose to a long sequence. It makes it easier to flow, rather than trying to be in one predetermined cycle. In a way, alot of what Youre showing is a Possible Best Case Scenario. Which is why whenever I initially comment on Your Videos, I mostly remark on the initial retaliation, and less so on what comes after. Theres no buts in this one, its just decently agreeable.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "possible best case scenario"...I look at it like jab-cross-hook-uppercut-overhand. It happens automatically when you practice it functionally and you automatically subconsciously make the correct adjustments on the fly. It's easily inculcated in sparring and multifight sparring. The huge advantage that it has is that BGs you haven't engaged yet don't preemptively prep their defenses vs your offensives because they see you're doing the same thing over and over again.

Now, if Youre so inclined, feel free to stop reading right about here.

Thanks for the offer but I'll keep reading.

And this is the biggest issue.
Chris, if Im not mistaken, delved into one particular aspect of the Kenpo side of the Defense. And then this somehow spiraled into a Kenpo debate. Lets look back at the Roots.

Every argument that my detractors have put forth thus far carries the intrinsic or specific belief that the more common version of Sword and Hammer is both THEE Sword and Hammer Ideal Phase Technique aaannnd that it's a functional combat model. These two premises are both comprehensively untrue, repudiated by Mr. Parker's own writings on the matter aaaand the posts of Doc Chapel, who is the ranking Kenpo senior on this board...and Doc is the only human being to my knowledge that can claim to have trained privately and exclusively with Mr. Parker for 3 decades literally up until his passing. Doc and I may disagree on say...training modalities and the values therein. But one thing that Doc is the undisputed Senior and Elder in is Kenpo history. He knows what many of the dark secrets are and where many of the buried skeletons are buried. He knows the real scoop on alot of people. He is absolutely and perpetually better informed in these matters than Chris--a non-Kenpoist who never met or trained with Mr.Parker--is. Doc categorically repudiated Chris' primary points. That ends all factual truthful honest accurate knowledgeable discussion preemptively...and confirms my positions [ taken since page 2 at the latest in this thread and roundly disputed up until this very page now by my detractors ] as the unvarnished involate truth in these areas. There is no counterpoint to truth or transcendant fact.

One may hypothesize that since Chris' positions lack any shred of martial validity, that he may be just voicing a contrary opinion solely due to what may be a pronounced dislike for yours truly...but that is merely a possible hypothesis



In other words, rethink the debate. Its gotten way off the mark from what it should be about. And I know, Ras, that Youve linked a whole lot of stuff about Preempting and whatnot, but each point You make is counterpointed, which You then counterpoint, then every 3-4 replies, it goes back to the start, and the cycle begins again.

See my previous point above, and let me emphasize another point: several of my detractors including Chris and I agreed about the importance of upholding legal moral and ethical standards and keeping these concerns as paramount in our counterattacks. I stated that this is one of the other essential services provided by my Cover and Spin in that you have time now to gather your senses and assess the situation. Is this a friend, is this a stranger, does this BG really deserve to be Sword and Hammer'd into oblivion? I am the first both on MT and KT to suggest various scenarios during which Sword and Hammer might be deployed, and most of the suggestions proffered much later on this thread on pg 18 are almost wholesale what I said days weeks and months previously. So even when suggesting plausible scenarios during which Sword and Hammer might be deployed? There is agreement between myself and my detractors to a significant extent.

Agree to Disagree (As You have attempted to just recently), or Demonstrate an Understanding even if You Disagree with whats being Understood.
Thats the only two ways this can go. Well, theres a Third.
More aimless debating.

I agree to disagree, I don't want any further aimless debating...but a video rebuttal by my more energetic detractors incarnating their points would also be very edifying. It's quite easy to snipe anonymously sans historical accuracy or rigorous facts and correctness about kenpo or the purpose and history of this tech via keyboard. It's quite another to have the faith knowledge self-assurance and skill to show yourself on video backing your words up.

The words in boldface are my reply to the quotes above.

 

[ATACX GYM]

LMFAO!! Brutha Ras, you can't be totally serious here. The way I view it...(and man, this is starting to sound like discussion with Jason Brinn...lol) we need both scripted and non scripted. The scripted stuff are the techs that are taught, you know, the list of 24/belt that're taught in 99.9% of the Kenpo schools out there. Like I've been saying for the past...gee, I lost track...lol...we use those as a platform to build from. THEN, we move to the non scripted techs. As I've taught...start with the base Lone Kimono. Drill that endlessly, gradually building up to a more aggressive, forceful attack. Finally, you add in a grab and punch, more movement, pushing, pulling, etc.

You're right...people who dont train like this will most likely be in for a surprise, because they'll probably only be used to the basic move. But I still stand firm in my belief that cramming tons of stuff down their throat at a rapid pace, is doing more harm than good. If it was that easy, then most students would only need to spend a month at a dojo, then they'd be able to go into the real world and be the next Superman...LOL.

What I meant by "scripted scenario" is the position that too many take that the more common version of THE SWORD AND HAMMER is THEE SCENARIO and THEE SWORD AND HAMMER. Of course I don't denigrate the importance of scenarios...I use them in my techs. Lolollololol.

I totally agree with you that cramming stuff down a person's throat at too rapid a pace is absolutely more harmful than it's beneficial...but I never said or suggested such a thing in the first place. THIS is what I said and suggested:

[video=youtube_share;kEZ-zAUEkR4]http://youtu.be/kEZ-zAUEkR4[/video]

 

[ATACX GYM]

I'm going to reply to a few segments of this post between Ras and Chris. My replies will have a * at the beginning and end, to make it easier..I think, as to who's saying what.




Right. Ras, try to listen here.



Ras, to be completely blunt, this is the core of your problems, and the absolute evidence that you are not in any way right. In the slightest. Let's demonstrate, as you seem rather ignorant of what, or even how a technique teaches it's lessons.

The lessons of EPAK Sword and Hammer are numerous, but some that are immediately apparent are as follows:
- When grabbed, capture the grabbing hand for psychological and physical control.

Grabbing the BG's hand doesn't give you psychological or physical control. He grabbed you in order to control you by locking you down into place for, pushing you away from, or pulling you in to the incoming blows that he's raining on you. Using your far hand to pin BG's hand to your shoulder simply means that you're unwise enough to remove your unencumbered limb from combat, thus opening up other lanes for the BG to attack and hurt you [ or his friends to do the same ] and removing your limb from the possibility of offensive strikes.

*I disagree Ras. It does give a psychological/physical control. The common response from the defender would be to try to pull away, not marry the badguys hands to your body. Its just like a weapon...the badguy is using that weapon for intimidation and control. Not saying that he wouldn't use it, but he's expecting compliance, not grabbing the weapon.*

MJS THE ONLY WAY THAT COULD BE TRUE IS IF THE BG ISN'T THROWING A PUNCH AT YOU WHEN HE GRABS YOU. IF YOU PIN HIS HAND ON YOUR SHOULDER WITH YOUR OFF HAND, HE'LL JUST HIT YOU ANYWAY. IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU ANY SORT OF PSYCHOLOGICAL OR PHYSICAL CONTROL. HE WON'T BE TRYING TO PULL AWAY HE'S ALREADY COMMITTED TO PUNCHING YOU. WHY WOULD HE PULL AWAY WHEN HE HAS HIS HAND ON YOUR SHOULDER AND HIS FIST COCKED AND IS IN THE MIDST OF FIRING A PUNCH OR--AS IN MY SCENARIO--HE'S ALREADY PUNCHED YOU AND YOU'RE RESPONDING TO HIS AGGRESSION BELATEDLY? HE'LL JUST KEEP HITTING YOU,MAN. I'M ACTUALLY SURPRISED THAT A GUY AS SHARP AS YOU ARE MISSED THAT. MAYBE YOU'RE ENVISIONING A SITUATION WHERE HE'S JUST GRABBED YOUR SHOULDER BUT HASN'T LOADED A PUNCH TO FIRE YET..?

- When being pulled, go with the energy of that pull.

Most of the more common Sword and Hammer sequences that I've seen live as well as those on YT do NOT feature an actual pull by uke. Most have him posing and doing nothing. But even if they did feature the pull? They neglect to address the very high probability that the BG's punch is hard on the heels of the pull, so they'll be pulled into the oncoming punch in far too many cases. The "more common" Sword and Hammer version that you claim is superior to mine doesn't remotely address this reality.

*Ras, you keep harping on this, and frankly its kinda old. Of course you don't see this in those techs. Why? Because once again, its a platform to build from. Your method is taking the student from step 1 to 10, without hitting 2 thru 9. You make it seem like you're the only one to address a punch. You're not. I do it, just not as rapidly as you're doing it.*

THE FACT THAT I INTRO THE PUNCH IMMEDIATELY DOESN'T MEAN THAT I'M GOING FROM 1 DIRECTLY TO 10, WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT I'M PRESENTING A COMPLETE SCENARIO FROM DAY ONE TO BE TRAINED AGAINST. WE BREAK DOWN OUR RESPONSES AGAINST THE GRAB AND PUNCH WITH THE COVER AND SPIN FIRST. WE DON'T EVEN PROGRESS TO THE NEXT MOVES UNTIL YOU'RE HIT FIRST, RECOVER, AND THEN SPIN. THAT IS THE MOST ESSENTIAL ASPECT OF THE SEQUENCE. WE COVER BEING PULLED INTO THE PUNCH AND JUST GOING WITH OUR SWORD AND HAMMER THERE AS WELL AS SPINNING AWAY AFTER WE'RE CRACKED FROM THE REAR AND BEING PUSHED AWAY BY BODY PRESSURE AND PUNCHES. WE FOLLOW A VERY SPECIFIC PROGRESSION AND WE COVER ALL OF THE PRIMARY STEPS IN BETWEEN...BUT WE PRESENT A COMPLETE RESPONSE. WE JUST DO SO, AS YOU STATED, EARLIER THAN YOU DO. THAT'S A MATTER OF TRAINING PREFERENCE AND TRAINING PARADIGM, NOT A LACK IN TRAINING QUALITY. I'M SURE YOU TEACH YOUR MORE SLOWLY PACED METHOD WELL, AND I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT I TEACH MINE VERY WELL INDEED. AS LONG AS THE RESULT IS A FULLY FUNCTIONAL STUDENT? I DON'T SEE TOO MUCH TO QUIBBLE ABOUT.

- The use of pre-emptive striking as a tactic.

As I have previously stated and left links proving to be true...Kenpo Elders like Larry Tatum and Doc Chapel find the "pre-emptive strike" notion to be questionable at best. On the mat? Their skepticism is thoroughly underscored by actually sparring with Sword and Hammer vs the Hockey Punch.

* And thats their opinion. The use of a pre-emptive strike is very useful. Theres nothing 'questionable' about it at all. Numerous RBSD guys use it and speak of its effectiveness. The #1 reason people 'question' its use, is because to the average Joe passerby, it'll look like WE are making the first move. What the untrained person IS NOT seeing, is the agressive, threatening actions, by the badguy. THAT right there, is assault. Sorry, but anyone who would wait for the punch to be half way to their face before reacting, well, they're an idiot. As I've said a million times, and I'll say it a million more....my safety, and that of anyone with me is my #1 concern! I'll deal with the other BS later. *

MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE SPECIFIC AND CLEAR: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE IDEA AND CONCEPT OF THE PREEMPTIVE STRIKE. THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF DIFFICULTY IN PULLING THIS CONCEPT OFF USING THIS SEQUENCE WHILE UNDER DURESS AND STILL HAVE A VERY HIGH LEVEL OF PROTECTION AGAINST LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS FOR GUESSING WRONG. WITHOUT SOME KIND OF ASSESSMENT MECHANISM BEING BUILT INTO THE SEQUENCE ITSELF AND REENFORCED VIA TRAINING, MUSCLE MEMORY COULD TAKE OVER AND YOU MIGHT BLAST SOMEBODY WHO DOESN'T DESERVE THE SWORD AND HAMMER INTO OBLIVION. OR YOU MIGHT GO OVERKILL WITH THE FORCE ON SOMEBODY WHO DOES INDEED DESERVE THE SWORD AND HAMMER. AND THERE ARE ALOT MORE ISSUES THAT I SEE WITH THE WHOLE PREEMPTIVE STRIKE NOTION--NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH IS THAT IT'S THE LEAST LIKELY TO HAPPEN UNDER DURESS IN THIS KIND OF HOCKEY PUNCH SCENARIO AND MOST DIFFICULT IN MOST CASES TO LEGALLY AND MORALLY JUSTIFY--BUT IF YOU END UP WITH A FULLY FUNCTIONAL STUDENT USING YOUR METHOD? HAVE AT IT THEN.

My responses are bolded italicized and underlined.

 

[ATACX GYM]

I still say that instead of trying to make a 1 size fits all model, we should address each thing as it was designed to be. Let me ask you this...why do we see pro fighters have multiple trainers? One for strength and conditioning, one for boxing skills, another for ground skills, and so forth.

As for the mult. attack situation...yup, certainly valid, but again, it seems to me, like way too much is being thrown at the student in too quick a fashion. IIRC, I started a thread on the Kenpo multi man attacks. FWIW, I'm not that impressed with them, but, they do give the student what the other techs do...a platform to build from. We want to talk about practicality, and functional things...well, I can come up with many more practical and functional ways to address multi man stuff, than what we see in the preset techs.

I don't offer a one size fit all approach, bruh. I simply point out that training A SINGLE TECH to handle MULTIPLE ATTACKS is the height of common sense, efficiency, and absolutely mandates much more higher levels of quality muscle reps using that same tech vs all manner of attacks. This makes you BETTER, not worse. It doesn't take more time either. If you take every tech you have and train it vs multiple attacks like this:

[video=youtube_share;kEZ-zAUEkR4]http://youtu.be/kEZ-zAUEkR4[/video]


then every tech you have that you formulate into a sequence is ALSO thoroughly flexible and capable of dealing with multiple attacks. The only limits to your application is your training model. I told you guys that my Sword and Hammer almost 100% translates to the ground and vs weapons exactly as you see it done empty handed. MJS, you should recall that the old skool Kali warriors are far famed for doing exactly the same thing, so your own art incarnates the truth of the position that I champion. I'm surprised that you in any way gainsay it.

Anyway...check this out...and recall that in this very thread people were saying that what I just showed being very very possible either WASN'T possible or would take too long. Neither is the case. Definitively.

[video=youtube_share;OgiiyO05OL4]http://youtu.be/OgiiyO05OL4[/video]

 

[Flying Crane]

Good points Mike. And you're right....anyone who is just more than a 'student' for lack of better words, will most likely get more knowledge, more secrets, etc. I'm in no way claiming to be all of what you describe above, but I feel that I've developed a more personal relatioship with a few of my teachers. Many times, we'll cover things that usually aren't taught or part of the regular required curriculum.





Haven't a clue, but thats the impression I've got from some posts I've read of Docs. And you're right...none would probably agree.

oh, I was in no way aiming any of this at you. Rather I was just making a contrast between how things work in the Chinese arts, and what we've been told about Mr. Parker creating a different and deliberately limited system to be taught to the masses, vs. what he did himself and for perhaps a handful of close students. On the surface it kinda sounds like the same thing, but I think there are a couple of fundamental differences that make a big difference in the intent.

 

[ATACX GYM]

Oh I know. I've been following the whole thread. Chris makes the same points I tried to make and then some and I don't see why Ras does not see where he is coming from. But if Ras honestly doesn't see what we are trying to tell him then no ammount of type or talk will persuade him otherwise.

it's not a matter of NOT grasping where you're coming from. I've been where you guys are. The difference is that I've continued to train and research and discovered that some of the previous beliefs I had that parallel yours are factually untrue and I made the mental adjustment...so now I no longer am confined by the inaccuracies of some of my previous beliefs. Doc's explanation about Big Red and what happened to the commercial vehicle of Motion Kenpo makes perfect sense to me...especially since it's literally backed up in black and white by Mr. Parker's own hand. I also recall my GM and other Elders debating some of these very points when I was a child growing up in the martial arts.

I used to think that training say the inside blocks was specific only to punches...until my GM told me at age 8 that this was not so. He then demonstrated to me that my very same inside block could and did stop a knife thrust, a stick attack, and both an ATTEMPTED lapel grab aaaand broke down the structure of an SUCCESSFUL lapel grab [ when combined with proper footwork and a solid base]. He showed me how the double lapel sweeping parry also broke the 2 handed throat strangle. It clicked for me right then. I got it. As a child. It's hard for me to accept that intelligent adults don't get it now.

Make no mistake about it. You either perceive the multiple uses of a single tech or you don't. If you perceive these multiple uses? Your training model changes in direct accordance with the degree of your perception and application of multiple uses. You don't have to do stuff exactly like I do...but you won't do things like you previously did. You have evolved, become more efficient, become simpler, more direct...and vastly amplified your combat options,skill and ability; merely by opening up your mind.

Like one of my Gym sayings goes...

IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND? YOU CHANGE YOUR WAYS...

 

[Thesemindz]

I've talked to Ras a great deal about his method and this technique in particular. It's not how I do kenpo, and it's not what I teach. But saying he doesn't know what he's talking about, or doesn't know what martial arts are about, or doesn't have a clue what techniques are for is way off base. He's an intelligent, highly skilled practitioner with over thirty years of training in multiple arts. Saying he doesn't know what he's talking about seems to me to be simply derogatory, and makes me wonder if people are actually watching his videos and reading his posts at all.

That doesn't mean I agree with his position on Sword and Hammer. I teach a version that is more or less equivalent to the basic EPAK technique. My student's first learn this technique about an hour in to their training. I teach the attack as an extended grab from the side. Nothing else. No pull. No push. No follow up strike. What some refer to as a "dead hand." The student then practices a static two strike combination. Chop the throat, hammer the groin. There are some finer points, but if you've seen the EPAK technique you get the drift.

The problem that I see with this discussion, and with most discussions between Ras and anyone who practices a more "traditional" EPAK variant, is that the technique you see in those videos and that I teach is not the entirety of the lesson. Looking at those videos I can see how Ras, with his real world experience and fighting knowledge, would think "that's unrealistic and simplistic." And of course he'd be right. But that technique is only the seed from which the fruit and the flower grow. It is not the final, live application of the knowledge. It is step one of an unending life long process. When I was coming up we learned this basic technique and then we applied it in all directions, and then we applied the kenpo formula, and then we applied it at all levels and ranges, and then we applied it in resistance drills, and then we applied it in spontaneous combat, and then we applied it against multiple opponents. The static technique you see in the youtube videos, and indeed that I still teach and practice regularly, is only the smallest part of that practice. It is the beginning, not the end.

Unfortunately I think that there are some kenpo schools for whom the IP phase truly is "the end." Not in the sense of some where the IP phase is the true combat model and all actions can be referred back to it through point referencing, grafting, and excision, but in the sense that I think some schools simply don't practice their material beyond memorization and rote repetition in order to advance in rank. I've seen it. Schools where the black belts can't perform the white belt material, or where the students can hammer a guy standing still in a technique line but can't counter a straight punch in a sparring match. These are "technique line" practitioners or "curriculum" black belts. They can show you what they memorized, but they can't execute what they've learned.

And that is where Ras' statement "it's not just what you know, it's how you train" comes in. If you take the base EPAK technique and train it spontaneously in a functional manner against active resistance, it can be an incredibly effective high percentage combination. I mean, you hit a guy in the throat and the groin. That's going to put him down. And if it doesn't, that means he's been forced to change his position, which changes the parameters of the engagement and calls for another response. That's just the fluidity of combat. But if you only play patty cake karate or only hit still statues then you are unlikely to develop the ability to fight with that material. Ras believes in a live training model. Some schools only practice a static training model. I believe in marrying the two. Because I believe there is a place for both. And when I am teaching a new technique, I always begin with the most static scenario possible with the smallest number of variables, and then slowly build from there. Because that is what I believe is the most effective way to teach kenpo. Not the fastest, or the most dynamic. But the most effective. At least in my experience. My students may progress slower, but I believe they do so on a firm foundation. And over time they will achieve real applicable skill using my method. I know because I've seen it.

Ras knows what he's talking about. I don't think he always knows what we're talking about, but you have to remember that he didn't come up in an EPAK style system. His kenpo background comes from the BKF, and if you are familiar with their practices and teachings they tended towards a more live, combat oriented, sparring based approach. So it doesn't surprise me at all that his method reflects that. His Sword and Hammer clearly doesn't teach the same lessons that mine does, and it clearly isn't applied in the same fashion. But that doesn't mean it can't or doesn't work for what he uses it for, it just means he's using a different tool for a different purpose. I think when he says that the tools that others use are broken he's wrong, but I've made that point to him and on these forums before. It's not the techniques, it's the instruction and the practice. We can all start with the same hammers and nails and wood, and still only those of us who know how to use them will end up building chairs. Some people just don't know how to use the tools they have, or even what those tools are.

From my conversations with Ras I've taken away that he believes in a high energy, highly functional, motion based training method that incorporates ambiguous motion, increasing resistance, and high reps. He believes that every technique should be immediately applicable against every possible scenario, and that seems to work for him and his students. I see the techniques more as small pieces of a greater whole which are designed to gradually structure a training method, the end result of which is functionality against every possible scenario. His students might be more functional after ten classes than mine are, I imagine after ten years we'd both have students that could fight. It's just another way to do things. That doesn't make him wrong, and it doesn't make him ignorant. He has a different paradigm, that doesn't invalidate mine any more than mine invalidates his. And the more we exchange ideas and share experiences, the more we realize how much more our philosophies converge than diverge.

I think he'd probably get farther, and I've told him this as well, if he didn't use EPAK names at all, or even reference them or EPAK training methods. If he just posted his videos without the commentary on EPAK I think more people would look at them for what they could gain from his practice rather than what he was wrong about. In his defense, even then he'd still have a lot of people telling him he was doing it all wrong, didn't know what he was talking about, and that all those things are already present in the EPAK system anyway so he's just wasting his time. But that's martial arts for you. Haters gotta hate, and some people are far too wedded to their own traditions to see value in the practices of others. Personally, I like a lot of what he does. And I see a lot of what I do reflected in it. Because at its root kenpo is supposed to work. And if your technique works, it probably looks like what works no matter what you call it. He's told me himself that he's had run ins with other more traditional kenpo cats who have been able to make their material work, despite being raised in what he would consider a "dysfunctional" system. Because it's not just what you know, it's how you train. And some people train very, very well.

I make the same recommendation to people who complain about his presentation all the time. Watch the video on mute. Take out the commentary and just look at the movements. See if it doesn't start making a lot more sense without all the words and emotions getting in the way. And remember that what you see is only a snapshot of what he's practicing with his students. And I tell Ras that what he sees in kenpo videos doesn't represent the entirety of their method either. Just like what's written in the manual is only the most basic representation of the material itself. In Go Rin No Sho Musashi states repeatedly "It is difficult to write about this in detail." Because what we do transcends both the written word and the visual medium. We can only ever convey the slightest aspect of our method through this type of exchange and I believe that is often at the heart of disagreements such as this. I don't doubt that were we to share the floor much that we perceive here as different or wrong would be made clear to us.

There is something to be gained from his high energy, high rep, live training model. I suggest everyone incorporate some aspect of it in to what they do. Similarly, I believe that Ras would do well to incorporate more static training in to what he does, because I believe that it is the root of developing an understanding of anatomical structure and principles of motion. I practice my stance in absolute stillness, so that I can access it perfectly in constant motion. But at the end of the day, I make sure I've done both.

I was taught that Forms were the mother of the art and Fighting was the father of the art. I believe that the same concept applies here. Static training teaches us what to do, live training teaches us how to do. As to his particular Sword and Hammer, I see many basic principles of combat which are being taught and which should be practiced in order to develop ability in combat. They are different from the principles of combat I teach in my Sword and Hammer, but if your system is sound then eventually the student should pretty much "get it," regardless of the specifics of any one technique or another.


-Rob

 

[ATACX GYM]

I've talked to Ras a great deal about his method and this technique in particular. It's not how I do kenpo, and it's not what I teach. But saying he doesn't know what he's talking about, or doesn't know what martial arts are about, or doesn't have a clue what techniques are for is way off base. He's an intelligent, highly skilled practitioner with over thirty years of training in multiple arts. Saying he doesn't know what he's talking about seems to me to be simply derogatory, and makes me wonder if people are actually watching his videos and reading his posts at all.

That doesn't mean I agree with his position on Sword and Hammer. I teach a version that is more or less equivalent to the basic EPAK technique. My student's first learn this technique about an hour in to their training. I teach the attack as an extended grab from the side. Nothing else. No pull. No push. No follow up strike. What some refer to as a "dead hand." The student then practices a static two strike combination. Chop the throat, hammer the groin. There are some finer points, but if you've seen the EPAK technique you get the drift.

The problem that I see with this discussion, and with most discussions between Ras and anyone who practices a more "traditional" EPAK variant, is that the technique you see in those videos and that I teach is not the entirety of the lesson. Looking at those videos I can see how Ras, with his real world experience and fighting knowledge, would think "that's unrealistic and simplistic." And of course he'd be right. But that technique is only the seed from which the fruit and the flower grow. It is not the final, live application of the knowledge. It is step one of an unending life long process. When I was coming up we learned this basic technique and then we applied it in all directions, and then we applied the kenpo formula, and then we applied it at all levels and ranges, and then we applied it in resistance drills, and then we applied it in spontaneous combat, and then we applied it against multiple opponents. The static technique you see in the youtube videos, and indeed that I still teach and practice regularly, is only the smallest part of that practice. It is the beginning, not the end.

Unfortunately I think that there are some kenpo schools for whom the IP phase truly is "the end." Not in the sense of some where the IP phase is the true combat model and all actions can be referred back to it through point referencing, grafting, and excision, but in the sense that I think some schools simply don't practice their material beyond memorization and rote repetition in order to advance in rank. I've seen it. Schools where the black belts can't perform the white belt material, or where the students can hammer a guy standing still in a technique line but can't counter a straight punch in a sparring match. These are "technique line" practitioners or "curriculum" black belts. They can show you what they memorized, but they can't execute what they've learned.

And that is where Ras' statement "it's not just what you know, it's how you train" comes in. If you take the base EPAK technique and train it spontaneously in a functional manner against active resistance, it can be an incredibly effective high percentage combination. I mean, you hit a guy in the throat and the groin. That's going to put him down. And if it doesn't, that means he's been forced to change his position, which changes the parameters of the engagement and calls for another response. That's just the fluidity of combat. But if you only play patty cake karate or only hit still statues then you are unlikely to develop the ability to fight with that material. Ras believes in a live training model. Some schools only practice a static training model. I believe in marrying the two. Because I believe there is a place for both. And when I am teaching a new technique, I always begin with the most static scenario possible with the smallest number of variables, and then slowly build from there. Because that is what I believe is the most effective way to teach kenpo. Not the fastest, or the most dynamic. But the most effective. At least in my experience. My students may progress slower, but I believe they do so on a firm foundation. And over time they will achieve real applicable skill using my method. I know because I've seen it.

Ras knows what he's talking about. I don't think he always knows what we're talking about, but you have to remember that he didn't come up in an EPAK style system. His kenpo background comes from the BKF, and if you are familiar with their practices and teachings they tended towards a more live, combat oriented, sparring based approach. So it doesn't surprise me at all that his method reflects that. His Sword and Hammer clearly doesn't teach the same lessons that mine does, and it clearly isn't applied in the same fashion. But that doesn't mean it can't or doesn't work for what he uses it for, it just means he's using a different tool for a different purpose. I think when he says that the tools that others use are broken he's wrong, but I've made that point to him and on these forums before. It's not the techniques, it's the instruction and the practice. We can all start with the same hammers and nails and wood, and still only those of us who know how to use them will end up building chairs. Some people just don't know how to use the tools they have, or even what those tools are.

From my conversations with Ras I've taken away that he believes in a high energy, highly functional, motion based training method that incorporates ambiguous motion, increasing resistance, and high reps. He believes that every technique should be immediately applicable against every possible scenario, and that seems to work for him and his students. I see the techniques more as small pieces of a greater whole which are designed to gradually structure a training method, the end result of which is functionality against every possible scenario. His students might be more functional after ten classes than mine are, I imagine after ten years we'd both have students that could fight. It's just another way to do things. That doesn't make him wrong, and it doesn't make him ignorant. He has a different paradigm, that doesn't invalidate mine any more than mine invalidates his. And the more we exchange ideas and share experiences, the more we realize how much more our philosophies converge than diverge.

I think he'd probably get farther, and I've told him this as well, if he didn't use EPAK names at all, or even reference them or EPAK training methods. If he just posted his videos without the commentary on EPAK I think more people would look at them for what they could gain from his practice rather than what he was wrong about. In his defense, even then he'd still have a lot of people telling him he was doing it all wrong, didn't know what he was talking about, and that all those things are already present in the EPAK system anyway so he's just wasting his time. But that's martial arts for you. Haters gotta hate, and some people are far too wedded to their own traditions to see value in the practices of others. Personally, I like a lot of what he does. And I see a lot of what I do reflected in it. Because at its root kenpo is supposed to work. And if your technique works, it probably looks like what works no matter what you call it. He's told me himself that he's had run ins with other more traditional kenpo cats who have been able to make their material work, despite being raised in what he would consider a "dysfunctional" system. Because it's not just what you know, it's how you train. And some people train very, very well.

I make the same recommendation to people who complain about his presentation all the time. Watch the video on mute. Take out the commentary and just look at the movements. See if it doesn't start making a lot more sense without all the words and emotions getting in the way. And remember that what you see is only a snapshot of what he's practicing with his students. And I tell Ras that what he sees in kenpo videos doesn't represent the entirety of their method either. Just like what's written in the manual is only the most basic representation of the material itself. In Go Rin No Sho Musashi states repeatedly "It is difficult to write about this in detail." Because what we do transcends both the written word and the visual medium. We can only ever convey the slightest aspect of our method through this type of exchange and I believe that is often at the heart of disagreements such as this. I don't doubt that were we to share the floor much that we perceive here as different or wrong would be made clear to us.

There is something to be gained from his high energy, high rep, live training model. I suggest everyone incorporate some aspect of it in to what they do. Similarly, I believe that Ras would do well to incorporate more static training in to what he does, because I believe that it is the root of developing an understanding of anatomical structure and principles of motion. I practice my stance in absolute stillness, so that I can access it perfectly in constant motion. But at the end of the day, I make sure I've done both.

I was taught that Forms were the mother of the art and Fighting was the father of the art. I believe that the same concept applies here. Static training teaches us what to do, live training teaches us how to do. As to his particular Sword and Hammer, I see many basic principles of combat which are being taught and which should be practiced in order to develop ability in combat. They are different from the principles of combat I teach in my Sword and Hammer, but if your system is sound then eventually the student should pretty much "get it," regardless of the specifics of any one technique or another.


-Rob

DAMN! Cosign!! Well said brutha...

 

[Twin Fist]

ok, EVERYONE in the world of martial arts is wrong but you

happy now?

 

[Twin Fist]

Rob,
i love you but you have been fooled. Ras isnt smart, look at how he handles disagreement? he ignores it. God forbid he actually consider someone else's opinion. NOPE, he rejects it without even thinking then copy pasts more tonnage of crap no one bothered to read the first 5 times he posted it. That isnt smart. Arrogance isnt smart. Arrogance is the hieght of ignorance to tell the truth.

You mention Ras supposed real world experience, i dont think he has any. ANY. he talks too much **** to actually be any good. NO ONE can remember what they do, move for move in a fight. Adreneline prohibits this. Yet he has regaled us with totally made up stories where he takes out whole gangs of bad guys without getting hit even once. This isnt possible in reality. In reality, you WILL get hit, even if you win, you will get hit.

Yes, you are right the BKF doesnt do things like others do. They spar, and nothing else really. They never really learn the lessons of kenpo, because NONE of them knew this information. The bulk of Kenpo in the BKF system comes from Steve Sanders, and he left BEFORE Parker revamped the system. I have seen this when i lived in long beach. The bkf guys were all great tourny fighters, and ****** teachers because they never learn anything in the first place but how to fight. They are not martial artists, they are fighters. Ras is like that. he is prob a good fighter, but he is a horrible martial artist.

You said " I don't think he always knows what we're talking about"

thats true, because we know martial arts, Ras doesnt. He thinks he does, but that doesnt change the fact that he doesnt know anywhere near what he thinks he does. And sorry, i dont for one second believe his BS claims about all those dan ranks. No one, NO ONE has TIME to do all that training, in THAT many arts, all to DAN level, unless they dont have a job....

also, You need to realize that we CANT listen to the vids on mute, that is like believing what you see in a movie. Anyone can LOOK like they know something, Matt Damon LOOKS like he knows something when you watch the Bourne movies, but i bet my last drop of blood damon cant teach ****. I dont care how well you move, if you cant explain it and teach it, you dont know it.

Ras is like that. He cant teach because he doesnt know what he is talking about. And he is not smart enough to know that he doesnt know. And his ego wont let him consider it.

Now, I have said more than once that his end result isnt always bad. But the thing is, even a busted watch is right, TWICE a day, but in the end, it is still a busted watch.

This isnt because i dislike the guy, and trust me, i really dislike him. But i refuse to take anyone seriously that says, quite literally, that everyone but him is wrong.

think about that.

or not, your call.

John

I've talked to Ras a great deal about his method and this technique in particular. It's not how I do kenpo, and it's not what I teach. But saying he doesn't know what he's talking about, or doesn't know what martial arts are about, or doesn't have a clue what techniques are for is way off base. He's an intelligent, highly skilled practitioner with over thirty years of training in multiple arts. Saying he doesn't know what he's talking about seems to me to be simply derogatory, and makes me wonder if people are actually watching his videos and reading his posts at all.

That doesn't mean I agree with his position on Sword and Hammer. I teach a version that is more or less equivalent to the basic EPAK technique. My student's first learn this technique about an hour in to their training. I teach the attack as an extended grab from the side. Nothing else. No pull. No push. No follow up strike. What some refer to as a "dead hand." The student then practices a static two strike combination. Chop the throat, hammer the groin. There are some finer points, but if you've seen the EPAK technique you get the drift.

The problem that I see with this discussion, and with most discussions between Ras and anyone who practices a more "traditional" EPAK variant, is that the technique you see in those videos and that I teach is not the entirety of the lesson. Looking at those videos I can see how Ras, with his real world experience and fighting knowledge, would think "that's unrealistic and simplistic." And of course he'd be right. But that technique is only the seed from which the fruit and the flower grow. It is not the final, live application of the knowledge. It is step one of an unending life long process. When I was coming up we learned this basic technique and then we applied it in all directions, and then we applied the kenpo formula, and then we applied it at all levels and ranges, and then we applied it in resistance drills, and then we applied it in spontaneous combat, and then we applied it against multiple opponents. The static technique you see in the youtube videos, and indeed that I still teach and practice regularly, is only the smallest part of that practice. It is the beginning, not the end.

Unfortunately I think that there are some kenpo schools for whom the IP phase truly is "the end." Not in the sense of some where the IP phase is the true combat model and all actions can be referred back to it through point referencing, grafting, and excision, but in the sense that I think some schools simply don't practice their material beyond memorization and rote repetition in order to advance in rank. I've seen it. Schools where the black belts can't perform the white belt material, or where the students can hammer a guy standing still in a technique line but can't counter a straight punch in a sparring match. These are "technique line" practitioners or "curriculum" black belts. They can show you what they memorized, but they can't execute what they've learned.

And that is where Ras' statement "it's not just what you know, it's how you train" comes in. If you take the base EPAK technique and train it spontaneously in a functional manner against active resistance, it can be an incredibly effective high percentage combination. I mean, you hit a guy in the throat and the groin. That's going to put him down. And if it doesn't, that means he's been forced to change his position, which changes the parameters of the engagement and calls for another response. That's just the fluidity of combat. But if you only play patty cake karate or only hit still statues then you are unlikely to develop the ability to fight with that material. Ras believes in a live training model. Some schools only practice a static training model. I believe in marrying the two. Because I believe there is a place for both. And when I am teaching a new technique, I always begin with the most static scenario possible with the smallest number of variables, and then slowly build from there. Because that is what I believe is the most effective way to teach kenpo. Not the fastest, or the most dynamic. But the most effective. At least in my experience. My students may progress slower, but I believe they do so on a firm foundation. And over time they will achieve real applicable skill using my method. I know because I've seen it.

Ras knows what he's talking about. I don't think he always knows what we're talking about, but you have to remember that he didn't come up in an EPAK style system. His kenpo background comes from the BKF, and if you are familiar with their practices and teachings they tended towards a more live, combat oriented, sparring based approach. So it doesn't surprise me at all that his method reflects that. His Sword and Hammer clearly doesn't teach the same lessons that mine does, and it clearly isn't applied in the same fashion. But that doesn't mean it can't or doesn't work for what he uses it for, it just means he's using a different tool for a different purpose. I think when he says that the tools that others use are broken he's wrong, but I've made that point to him and on these forums before. It's not the techniques, it's the instruction and the practice. We can all start with the same hammers and nails and wood, and still only those of us who know how to use them will end up building chairs. Some people just don't know how to use the tools they have, or even what those tools are.

From my conversations with Ras I've taken away that he believes in a high energy, highly functional, motion based training method that incorporates ambiguous motion, increasing resistance, and high reps. He believes that every technique should be immediately applicable against every possible scenario, and that seems to work for him and his students. I see the techniques more as small pieces of a greater whole which are designed to gradually structure a training method, the end result of which is functionality against every possible scenario. His students might be more functional after ten classes than mine are, I imagine after ten years we'd both have students that could fight. It's just another way to do things. That doesn't make him wrong, and it doesn't make him ignorant. He has a different paradigm, that doesn't invalidate mine any more than mine invalidates his. And the more we exchange ideas and share experiences, the more we realize how much more our philosophies converge than diverge.

I think he'd probably get farther, and I've told him this as well, if he didn't use EPAK names at all, or even reference them or EPAK training methods. If he just posted his videos without the commentary on EPAK I think more people would look at them for what they could gain from his practice rather than what he was wrong about. In his defense, even then he'd still have a lot of people telling him he was doing it all wrong, didn't know what he was talking about, and that all those things are already present in the EPAK system anyway so he's just wasting his time. But that's martial arts for you. Haters gotta hate, and some people are far too wedded to their own traditions to see value in the practices of others. Personally, I like a lot of what he does. And I see a lot of what I do reflected in it. Because at its root kenpo is supposed to work. And if your technique works, it probably looks like what works no matter what you call it. He's told me himself that he's had run ins with other more traditional kenpo cats who have been able to make their material work, despite being raised in what he would consider a "dysfunctional" system. Because it's not just what you know, it's how you train. And some people train very, very well.

I make the same recommendation to people who complain about his presentation all the time. Watch the video on mute. Take out the commentary and just look at the movements. See if it doesn't start making a lot more sense without all the words and emotions getting in the way. And remember that what you see is only a snapshot of what he's practicing with his students. And I tell Ras that what he sees in kenpo videos doesn't represent the entirety of their method either. Just like what's written in the manual is only the most basic representation of the material itself. In Go Rin No Sho Musashi states repeatedly "It is difficult to write about this in detail." Because what we do transcends both the written word and the visual medium. We can only ever convey the slightest aspect of our method through this type of exchange and I believe that is often at the heart of disagreements such as this. I don't doubt that were we to share the floor much that we perceive here as different or wrong would be made clear to us.

There is something to be gained from his high energy, high rep, live training model. I suggest everyone incorporate some aspect of it in to what they do. Similarly, I believe that Ras would do well to incorporate more static training in to what he does, because I believe that it is the root of developing an understanding of anatomical structure and principles of motion. I practice my stance in absolute stillness, so that I can access it perfectly in constant motion. But at the end of the day, I make sure I've done both.

I was taught that Forms were the mother of the art and Fighting was the father of the art. I believe that the same concept applies here. Static training teaches us what to do, live training teaches us how to do. As to his particular Sword and Hammer, I see many basic principles of combat which are being taught and which should be practiced in order to develop ability in combat. They are different from the principles of combat I teach in my Sword and Hammer, but if your system is sound then eventually the student should pretty much "get it," regardless of the specifics of any one technique or another.


-Rob

 

[ATACX GYM]

Allow me to expound a little more, my friend Rob...I don't have a problem with starting the lesson for Sword and Hammer as you do. My primary concern centers around those who claim that what we see on the video is combat viable. In essence, they're asserting that what we see works exactly as shown against dynamic attack which they're not showing. Having both trained with and fought with the more or less traditional version prior to developing my current Sword and Hammer Radius R.D.L., I strongly disagree.

There is a training method, a paradigm, that requires training the tech against escalating resistance that would change the expression of what we see here. When I saw that video of you sparring with your student and executing Sword and Hammer when you WEREN'T grabbed as well as forcing the clinch and executing Sword and Hammer? You displayed what I was talking about: you didn't look my variant but the process of practicing against resistance necessarily negates the argument that literally nothing except the left hand flank grab upon your right shoulder vs an opponent who's cocked back his right fist and poses is THEE ONLY AND TRUE Sword and Hammer. You further displayed that learning the tech functionally automatically covers the scenario more commonly touted in the less versatile more common model, whereas the converse can never be true.

"IT'S NOT JUST WHAT YOU KNOW, IT'S HOW AND WHY YOU TRAIN..."

Like I keep saying...matwork kills contrary arguments because you must show and prove there. You MUST. If your stuff works? We will come closer and closer together on the mat because it eliminates the nonsense. Furthermore, that same matwork imparts and enforces the ability to recognize functionality on the parts of others who DON'T use the same expression as you do but who DO know what they're doing in a scrap. LuckyK doesn't fight like Doc who doesn't fight like Rob who doesn't fight like nelson who doesn't fight like MJS who doesn't fight like me...but we all can fight and we recognize the functionality in each of us; even while we recognize and debate about the differences that we see amonst each other too.

In other words? Real recognizes real.

My detractors are lookin mighty unfamiliar to the functional fam, but mighty similar to the less functional to the wholly dysfunctional clan. Anyone who asserts the combat viability of a tech that specifically was designed as an outline and suggestion and NOT a combat model really should have their combat IQ checked and questioned. No disrespect to anyone, but that's just common sense.

 

[Twin Fist]

yep

everyone is wrong but you

 

[ATACX GYM]

"... think he'd probably get farther, and I've told him this as well, if he didn't use EPAK names at all, or even reference them or EPAK training methods. If he just posted his videos without the commentary on EPAK I think more people would look at them for what they could gain from his practice rather than what he was wrong about. In his defense, even then he'd still have a lot of people telling him he was doing it all wrong, didn't know what he was talking about, and that all those things are already present in the EPAK system anyway so he's just wasting his time. But that's martial arts for you. Haters gotta hate, and some people are far too wedded to their own traditions to see value in the practices of others. Personally, I like a lot of what he does. And I see a lot of what I do reflected in it. Because at its root kenpo is supposed to work. And if your technique works, it probably looks like what works no matter what you call it. He's told me himself that he's had run ins with other more traditional kenpo cats who have been able to make their material work, despite being raised in what he would consider a "dysfunctional" system. Because it's not just what you know, it's how you train. And some people train very, very well..."--Thesemindz


Very well said. A masterful post overall, my kenpo brother.

I think you'll be happy to hear that most of my remaining techs don't have traditional "EPAK" names and whatnot, and it will be interesting to note how the reaction to these techs will be. I thought that calling my stuff ATACX GYM KENPO was sufficient to differentiate it from ED PARKER KENPO or SL-4 or LUCKYK KENPO or THESEMINDZ KENPO. Guess it wasn't sufficient for some people.

Well, for all of them? Literally 90% of my remaining techs have names you'll find only in my ATACX GYM. Hope that helps you feel better. If not? That's okay too.

Keep training.

AMANI..."peace"...

 

[ATACX GYM]

Let's try something less acrimonious but still germane to the Sword and Hammer subject.

A couple of questions:

How likely is the hammerfist to actual hit the scrotum of the male offender [ no disrespect ladies, a Falcon Punch to the nethers is no bowl of joy for either sex...] ? What would you do to ensure that the hammerfist actually hits the sack as opposed to any other body part? Would you substitute another area, like the bladder? If so...what would be the looked for effect of this target substitution and why would you substitute this target?

What if the throat is too far away cuz the BG's too tall or maybe he has a heavy jacket and scarf on...and you're a Yellow Belt being grabbed by the flank?

Let's try to make this thread make a turn for the less arsenic. Whaddya say?