Sword and hammer pt. 1 and 2

[Twin Fist]

that thing you swore you never do?


you are doing it again.

 

[MJS]

You can have the basics and formulate from there, but the impetus to develope responses to multiple stimuli would have to be imbedded in the curriculum...and it would take longer to do. Contrary to popular opinion. If you train functionally...only if you train functionally, mandating movement, energy, escalating resistance, requiring timing and sensitivity...

Actually, instead of imbedding hundreds of crazy techs, what they'd be imbedding is the basics. The basics can/should be able to be put into endless combos. Look at boxing. You have the basic punches, ie: jab, cross, hook, uppercut. Those punches can be put into endless combos. Yet a boxer crafts his own combo, depending on the openings his opp. presents. Apply that same logic to Kenpo. Oh gee...the white belt doesnt have a tech for a rt. hook yet? Sure they do. They know how to block and punch. Step up with a block, blast them in the face with a palm, knee them in the balls. Theres your tech. KISS baby KISS.

You will have more tools to address various scenarios with the 'wealth of techs' approach, and if you train each of these techs to perform in every range of combat? Not only do you have the launch pad of proven techs that you've developed real skill with, you develope your own responses to multiple striking armed multifight unarmed grappling etc real life situations, you'll have an arsenal that you can and will deploy and employ vs skilled martial artists--even other Kenpoists--and they'll have either NO idea what is happening or will be very hard pressed indeed to deal with your offensives and defenses.

IMO, you dont need a ton of tools. Having a ton of tools is having hundreds of techs. Basic blocks, punches and kicks is all you need.

Seriously speaking...how many bjj guys have ever in life seen somebody use Glancing Wing, Triggered Salute, Gathering Clouds, or Desperate Falcons EVER IN LIFE. Much less used [ in a row] to pass the guard. There is a knee torque just waiting to be used in Triggered Salute, and a sweet beatdown and knee torque counter to the triangle choke in Snapping Twig. Well...in my Gym's Ideal Technique of them there are. Lol. How could the bjj guys defend against that? They'd be ALMOST as clueless as Kenpo guys were when bjj guys used to take guys down and choke the bejeezus out of them in the mid-90s.

Probably not that many. But thats ok, because I'll be using pieces, if possible, rather than trying to figure out how to make that standup tech work on the ground, and I'll be falling back on the grappling basics that I know. What I find interesting is the number of Kenpo guys that cross train. If it was that complete of a package, that probably wouldnt happen.

 

[Josh Oakley]

I recall him making a similar movement in pursuit of a vocabulary of movement, changing the meaning of "words of movement" and forming "phrases and sentences". He would take one tech and express it one way in one movement and do a different movement or sometimes THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what's in the technique and explain why it makes sense.

Contrary to the claims of my detractors, my position and expression is in full lockstep with what Mr. Parker said. Observe Mr. Parker talking about Short One in a seminar, showing the tech in the form, and then...because "now it's a street situation...I'm scared, I don't step back I step forward and booop! Dammit I broke his nose..." or something like that.

[video=youtube_share;6SIQ7ONlE1I]http://youtu.be/6SIQ7ONlE1I[/video]


The deeper you delve into the movements, the more universally you apply the techniques, the deeper more comprehensive more interconnected more intuitive more capable more knowledgeable your Kenpo and straight up movement knowledge is. This is what pract icing the movements over and over against resistance, against multiple stimuli, forces you to grasp. You grasp it better faster deeper and more thoroughly than other training models tend to offer because the lack the multiple stimuli, the forced times where you have to cogitate, reflect, make connections, adjustments, study not only Kenpo but the sciences of movement and high performance in all of their interrelated glory...the more you achieve heights and wells of knowledge that you never would ahve even attempted previously. You would've been too ignorant to ask the questions, much less seek the answers to issues and conundrums that you never even knew existed.

This is what I would call a very good post. Much more to the point. (Though most of the last paragraph was unnecessary. It would be more suited to teaching a class of students than in a discussion thread full of people with 10-30 years experience in the martial arts, many of us being teachers, who already KNOW a lot of the stuff you said. Probably could have pared it down more.

Also, your use of the terms "cogitate" and "reflect" right next to each other is redundant. That is what I mean when I talk about your verbosity. Again, the difference between verbosity and eloquence is efficiency.)

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

 

[Flying Crane]

So, I will have to do some looking, because the last time I saw this was YEARS ago. But I distinctly remember an interview with Ed Parker where he said that the point of all those techs is to teach the principles of kempo (sorry. KENPO!), and there were so many so that you didn't get Hung up on the techniques themselves, but instead on the principles they taught.

I will see if I can find it.


Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

I don't know what Mr. Parker may have said, but this strikes me as being the opposite of what really happens. With so many techs, it's almost impossible to NOT become hung up on the techs.

 

[Twin Fist]

agree, with so many, you spend your time learning and practicing them all.

 

[ATACX GYM]

Uh... Joe Louis wrote a whole book on it.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1581607156


Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

Actually pick up the book and open it. My older cousin--boxing fanatic--just happens to have that book. Joe Louis was the SUBJECT of the book but he didn't WRITE it...a ghostwriter and photographer did. Although Joe was quick of mind, for quite some time his literacy level was low due to the racist prohibitions against and societal road blocks set against Black people learning high level academics at that time. And if that's too much for you? Then swap Jack Johnson for Joe Louis. My point remains clear and unflawed.

But even if Joe DID write a book? I gave multiple examples. You were only able to select one book that Joe Louis was the subject of. That would make Joe the exception that proves the rule and that means that my point still stands. All of the warriors I mentioned are hellafied boxers. None of them famously held forth upon the principles and power generating mechanisms of boxing. If you doubted their knowledge of same? Get in the ring with them. When you wake back up? You'll be a convert. Unless you're stupid.

 

[ATACX GYM]

I don't know what Mr. Parker may have said, but this strikes me as being the opposite of what really happens. With so many techs, it's almost impossible to NOT become hung up on the techs.

Disagree. Many of the techs not only have multiple applications that you don't begin to grasp until you practice them vs resistance, but many of the techs are also mirror images of each other...and require you to do the mirror image in a different scenario. There's a 5 Swords kind of flow to, for instance, Heavenly Ascent. You're learning the multiple applications of that one movement and how it applies to multiple scenarios; multiple attacks. You learn multiple applications not just for a specific sequence but multiple applications to a specific kind of flow of movement. When you add resistance? You learn this lesson much earlier, and you realize that Kenpo simultaneously stimulates your mind and expands your movement vocabulary in very specific ways. Synergistic ways. You can perceive and amplify the quality of movement of other arts accordingly and very rapidly. Kenpo imo is very similar to Functional Capoeira in that regard.

"Not every movement is a technique but every technique is a movement. You have to train your mind to move your body with better quality. The more quality movements you get..the better anything you do in the martial arts becomes. That's how you improve organically and synergistically."--Frank Shamrock to me, when he was based out of the RAW Center

 

[ATACX GYM]

Actually, instead of imbedding hundreds of crazy techs, what they'd be imbedding is the basics. The basics can/should be able to be put into endless combos. Look at boxing. You have the basic punches, ie: jab, cross, hook, uppercut. Those punches can be put into endless combos. Yet a boxer crafts his own combo, depending on the openings his opp. presents. Apply that same logic to Kenpo. Oh gee...the white belt doesnt have a tech for a rt. hook yet? Sure they do. They know how to block and punch. Step up with a block, blast them in the face with a palm, knee them in the balls. Theres your tech. KISS baby KISS.



IMO, you dont need a ton of tools. Having a ton of tools is having hundreds of techs. Basic blocks, punches and kicks is all you need.



Probably not that many. But thats ok, because I'll be using pieces, if possible, rather than trying to figure out how to make that standup tech work on the ground, and I'll be falling back on the grappling basics that I know. What I find interesting is the number of Kenpo guys that cross train. If it was that complete of a package, that probably wouldnt happen.

I'm not denying that you develope basic techs and keep it KISS, but man...we're talking about training paradigms and training preferences, not how an art itself can perform. For instance, if you keep picking up and dumping a Kenpo guy or a Tai Chi guy on their heads, or slamming them and choking or locking the holy crap out of them, eventually they will adapt their art to that scenario and eventually they will be able to give you close combat on the ground.

The process is much faster, much simpler, and imo smarter if they go to a good Judo or Hapkido or bjj or submission wrestling or catchwrestling school which will provide you with tools right away. I did. But I didn't go in there to become a better judoka or a better hapkidoka, a better wrestler and jits man [ although I achieved all of the above ]. Nope. I came in there to become a better martial artist. I specifically looked for ways and training methods that could inform my striking with grappling that strikers were unprepared for, inform my grappling with striking that grapplers were unprepared for, and I looked to outstrike strikers and outgrapple grapplers and outstrike, outgrapple, and out duel weaponeers.

Cross training is GREAT. Vital. Important. Imho at any rate. But at no time does the current state of affairs regarding Kenpo reflect what we know its historical roots are...which are shared by bjj. Kenpo's historical roots go back to kenpojujutsu, if I'm not mistaken. And so do bjj's. The training emphasis of jujutsu was largely removed and redirected toward standup combat, and that is what denuded our current Kenpo of intricate grappling skill. The more that Kenpoists train in international Judo, Hapkido, and bjj? The more material they have to add back into Kenpo's matrix, and the more knowledge and skill they have to adapt their tech rich base to their new skill sets...and the more they appreciate Kenpo. Because the foundational base for all of that stuff is still in Kenpo. The converse claim cannot be made [ except for Hapkido, which is an art that is very much slept on imo ].

 

[Flying Crane]

Disagree. Many of the techs not only have multiple applications that you don't begin to grasp until you practice them vs resistance, but many of the techs are also mirror images of each other...and require you to do the mirror image in a different scenario. There's a 5 Swords kind of flow to, for instance, Heavenly Ascent. You're learning the multiple applications of that one movement and how it applies to multiple scenarios; multiple attacks. You learn multiple applications not just for a specific sequence but multiple applications to a specific kind of flow of movement. When you add resistance? You learn this lesson much earlier, and you realize that Kenpo simultaneously stimulates your mind and expands your movement vocabulary in very specific ways. Synergistic ways. You can perceive and amplify the quality of movement of other arts accordingly and very rapidly. Kenpo imo is very similar to Functional Capoeira in that regard.

"Not every movement is a technique but every technique is a movement. You have to train your mind to move your body with better quality. The more quality movements you get..the better anything you do in the martial arts becomes. That's how you improve organically and synergistically."--Frank Shamrock to me, when he was based out of the RAW Center

I'll just say that in my experience, it didn't work for me. The curriculum was cumbersome and unwieldy and it made for a scattered training session because there was a scramble to keep up with all the material that we needed to learn, because that was what the curriculum was.

I honestly do not believe it is a good way to structure a curriculum, nor a good way to develop the principles. But that's my take on it, and that's why I dont do it anymore.

 

[ATACX GYM]

I'll just say that in my experience, it didn't work for me. The curriculum was cumbersome and unwieldy and it made for a scattered training session because there was a scramble to keep up with all the material that we needed to learn, because that was what the curriculum was.

I honestly do not believe it is a good way to structure a curriculum, nor a good way to develop the principles. But that's my take on it, and that's why I dont do it anymore.

I agree that oftentimes the lack of knowledge and life experience of various teachers practically guarantee insufficiently functional training and improperly or less beneficially structured curriculums. Sorry to hear that your experience wasn't best for you but at least you found what you wanted in your gungfu stuff. Got any videos of your art online anywhere? I'd like to see it.

 

[Flying Crane]

I agree that oftentimes the lack of knowledge and life experience of various teachers practically guarantee insufficiently functional training and improperly or less beneficially structured curriculums. Sorry to hear that your experience wasn't best for you but at least you found what you wanted in your gungfu stuff. Got any videos of your art online anywhere? I'd like to see it.

The thing is, I believe that I had one of the best instructors in kenpo, and probably THE best instructor in Tracy kenpo. Ted is extremely knowledgeable, extremely skilled, and has a huge amount of life experience to backup what he does. He was in the military in Vietnam, and then had a career as a police officer including some ugly undercover stuff. If there is anyone who had the opportunity to figure out what works and what doesn't, it's Ted. He believes in the system whole-heartedly, but I just couldn't get it to be a good fit for me. That's why I finally concluded that what works great for some doesn't work so well for others, and the whole approach of kenpo is just not a good fit for me.

I and my Sifu and my Sihing do not make videos and to put up on Youtube. There are some other videos out there, done by other folks, but to be honest I am always reluctant to point them out to people because I've not see a good example yet. What I've seen has been decidely lousy and does not convey the true lessons that the system offers. The examples are typically of forms and not generally application (tho I've seen a little bit of application online), and the forms are done sloppily and are done more as a performance than as a training tool so the very fundamentals get compromised, and that's largely because none of these "instructors" really understand what they are doing.

So yes, it's out there, but I don't think you will get a very good idea of the system from watching them, and actually you will probably look at them and think, "wow, that sucks". I agree. What you see there sucks. But what you see there is not a good example of the system, you won't find that online. Sifu often shows us video clips that he finds, and then points out why they are so bad. He uses Youtube as an example of how NOT to do our system, and he uses Youtube as an insult: "That was no good, do it again! You wanna be like on Youtube??!!"

If you are interested, you can look for Tibetan White Crane (not to be confused with the Fukienese White Crane, totally different system), in Cantonese it's Bak Hok Kuen, or variations of that, Bac Hok, Ba hok, etc. The Fukienese goes by "bai he", so that's a way to distinguish, and the Fukienese looks a bit like Wing Chun, while the Tibetan is very "long arm" with lots of movement and stepping in how we train. Again, those might help you to distinguish what you are looking at.

 

[Josh Oakley]

Actually pick up the book and open it. My older cousin--boxing fanatic--just happens to have that book. Joe Louis was the SUBJECT of the book but he didn't WRITE it...a ghostwriter and photographer did. Although Joe was quick of mind, for quite some time his literacy level was low due to the racist prohibitions against and societal road blocks set against Black people learning high level academics at that time. And if that's too much for you? Then swap Jack Johnson for Joe Louis. My point remains clear and unflawed.

But even if Joe DID write a book? I gave multiple examples. You were only able to select one book that Joe Louis was the subject of. That would make Joe the exception that proves the rule and that means that my point still stands. All of the warriors I mentioned are hellafied boxers. None of them famously held forth upon the principles and power generating mechanisms of boxing. If you doubted their knowledge of same? Get in the ring with them. When you wake back up? You'll be a convert. Unless you're stupid.

It has Joe Louis listed as the author. Until either of actually reads the book, I will assume be wrote it.

But your point is not disagreed with. You don't have to know how to explain something to be able to do it, and I don't think anyone is actually arguing against it, Ras.

It is, however, irrelevant. Doing something is different than TEACHING something. When we are talking about being able to DEVELOP a technique and EXPLAIN it, we are talking about TEACHING.

And a good TEACHER understands and can explain those mechanisms.

I am NOT saying that you aren't a good teacher, or that you can't explain your stuff.

I merely pointed out that Joe Louis wrote a book. Reacting one freaking statement doesn't invalidate your whole freaking argument. Don't just try and correct me when you obviously haven't read the freaking book either. Don't freaking preach to me about the low literacy rate of blacks at the time as if I didn't already freaking know.

Until you pick up the book, there is no harm about admitting you MIGHT be wrong about ONE freaking point. It doesn't discredit you, it doesn't invalidate your arguments. It shows you have academic and intellectual freaking INTEGRITY.

If you haven't guessed, I am mildly peeved.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

 

[Flying Crane]

"Not every movement is a technique but every technique is a movement. You have to train your mind to move your body with better quality. The more quality movements you get..the better anything you do in the martial arts becomes. That's how you improve organically and synergistically."--Frank Shamrock to me, when he was based out of the RAW Center

First the mind needs to understand HOW to move with better quality. If you cannot describe it and understand it intellectually, it's unlikely you will be able to do it. Once you understand it, then you can train the body to do it. But it takes focused training to do so, and the most important place where this must be done is in the basics and fundamentals. If the basics and fundamentals are done with better quality, then yes, everything else you do will be better quality.

I actually believe that a lot of the SD techs found in kenpo are not of a high quality. Some are, many are not. I've seen and learned a lot of them that I felt were simply bad ideas, built on flawed concepts. These are things that may look good on paper, but don't pass the BS meter when considering whether they would really work somehow.

then again, there are those who claim to, or even actually can, use the stuff. So it still comes down to the individual and what is the best match for that person.

 

[Josh Oakley]

Here is a discussion from over KT that refers to this thread, and therefore has bearing on it. I added numbers in Doc's response because it was less tedious than trying to rebuild it as one post, like I wanted to do, since that would be more accurate to how Doc's post shows up on KT.

Unfortunately, tapatalk doesn't grab quotes within other quotes.

This question is mainly directed to Doc, but of course, anyone else is free to chime in with your thoughts as well.

Ok..here goes....over at Martial Talk, there is currently a 20+ page thread...actually, closer to 30 pages now..lol...on the discussion of the technique Sword and Hammer. The thread was started by Ras, basically comparing his version of S&H and the version that we see in many schools. Ras states that the reason his version looks nothing like what we typically see, is because Mr. Parker never intended for there to be a set version, that what we see in something like "Big Red" was a guide..nothing more. Mr. Parker wanted people to craft their own expression of all of the techniques.

Now, I find this interesting, because if that was the case, then I'd imagine there'd be numerous versions of the techs. I'd have 'my' expression, Ras would have his, my students would have theirs, and so forth. I further stated that if that was the case, then when people went to seminars, it'd be close to impossible for the person giving the seminar, to teach people. Ex: Lets say Larry Tatum was giving a seminar. He'd have his version, along with the other 100 people at the event, so how could any learning be done, if everyone is doing something different?

So, in that thread, I asked some questions, to which I received some answers, but not really answering my questions fully, so here I am...coming to the source (Doc) in hopes to have my curiosity satisfied.

1) Doc, do you teach the techs that're found in Big Red? If so, what changes, if any, have you made to them? I was told that you may not wish to divulge alot of info regarding what you do, and thats fine.

2) If the techs were to be used as just a guide, and we were in fact supposed to create our own expression, why do we see the majority of schools out there, teaching the same way?

3) Doc, in another thread, you mentioned that you don't allow your students to engage in any "What if/Even if" talk, until way later in training. At what point do you allow this?

4) Did Mr. Parker want everyone to form their own expressions of the techs? If so, then woudn't we have what I said above....a ton of different versions of a tech?

Just a closing note: I'm mainly looking to have these 4 questions answered. I understand the thread may drift a bit from the 4 questions, however, I'm not looking at rehashing a thread similar to the current one at MT.

1)Some of them, although they are "ideally" structured to fit street and function parameters with "even if's."

2)So-called teachers were lazy, or didn't have the knowledge and skill to construct the ideal as Mr. Parker wanted them to do. So they generally followed the dysfunctional outline in the manuals.

3)"What if" is not allowed. "Even if" better be there, as a part of the default execution. I use the word "default" instead of "ideal" so Ras won't get confused. You know, he can't hear Jimi, but won't admit it. Anyway, even "tailoring" is built into the technique and is taught tailored for individuals who may need a tailored version for physical deficiencies or disparities, but even that is mapped so it doesn't change the overall effect of the technique function. Only senior black belts do this for themselves, but even then the material seems to satisfy them, and ideas of "what if" have already been addressed, so any variation is already in the curriculum.

However, I do vehemently encourage them to explore anything they feel is useful for personal expression. I've even encouraged them to go teach on their own in a club, or open a school. But, no one wants to miss classes at the home school. They are NOT however allowed to change the curriculum without consultation and committee approval because of the archival nature, and the progressive neuromuscular programming function of the way the curriculum is designed.

When you change something, it impacts everything else, and therefore has to be considered from that perspective. Sometimes something does need to be changed, and when that happens, things that are affected by the change must be addressed and changed as well. There are no independent movements in the system process. Everything is connected to everything else, just like in human anatomy.

As others have so eloquently stated, while it is true Mr. Parker wanted instructors who were heads of schools and clubs to formulate the "ideal" for each technique, using his principles and ideas within their group of followers, once the BIG Red technique manuals came out, AND they found their way down to the white belts as a revenue stream, everyone seem to try to just do the outline in the manuals - no matter how ridiculous they were. It was the easiest thing to do. Follow the material, get promoted. No thinking necessary.

Most wanted "traditionalize" that version of Kenpo, and treat it like other arts, with definitive techniques, when Mr. Parker had not done that for that particular interpretation. He planned to do so with what he branded "American Kenpo," as an offshoot to the "Chinese Kenpo" he was doing, first influenced by Ark Wong. And although he briefly mentioned the "American Kenpo" idea that most ran with, he never actually began the project instead being forced into bankruptcy and creating "Ed Parker's Kenpo Karate" as a money making commercial venture. After all he had 5 children, and a Mother to take care of.

MOST just did what was written in the manuals, while Mr. Parker traveled trying to teach the principles to give students the skills to do what he wanted. They didn't for the most part. There are some good guys, but most are few and far between. And, you'll find those that are reasonably good, moved away from the manual outline versions of the material and began to think for themselves. As much as it may seem sometimes that I am bashing Kenpo Karate, it is in fact a viable well structured piece of work that displays Mr. Parker's genius for organization.

What Mr. Parker did not count on was how the business of money and rank would overwhelm instructors desire to be efficient and good at what they did. He didn't anticipate the plethora of at best marginal practitioners who, having paid their way, would be allowed to move through the ranks and turn into teaching versions of themselves. No knowledge, no skill, and no experience teaching others who were the same. Follow the material and get the belt. Reality did not matter. Rank became everything, and competency took a back seat. The art grew so fast, it was out of control. It only had one expert, and there were people promoting everywhere. To deny promotions would kill the business, so he ultimately placed the onus of competency back on its teachers, who for the most part, failed miserably.

Response to the closing note:

Yeah Ras went through the same thing over here as well. He doesn't do EPKK, that is clear. What he doesn't get is he insists on using the terminology and technique names, while giving many the impression he is fixing EPKK. His teaching method from a systemic perspective is also extremely flawed, and there is a great deal of knowledge he doesn't have. He sees what he does as just a series of technique movements, and insists we don't understand him and puts up a bunch a videos that confirm what we already know, that many before him have done - with the same amount of success. But, everyone has to be comfortable in their method, and the smart figure out when it is no good - eventually - I hope.

 

[Josh Oakley]

More from Doc:

Here's what Ras doesn't get. Yes. Mr. Parker wanted you to create your own "Ideal." he said it in print and it is in my archives on the subforum. But, he did publish an outline of each technique to serve as a guide. "Sword and Hammer" is about using a "hand sword, and a hammer-fist" for a flank one handed attack shoulder grab. Now, make that idea work. Don't turn it into defending a round off flip flop because that's not what it is supposed to be. Other attacks are explored progressively later in the system. Ras is making the same mistake others made. he's what if-ing his own modedl to death, with no definitive answers to anything because he doesn't understand how people learn, not how systems are built and designed. What he is doing is great for him personally, but not for teaching other people. You create skills and then build upon them, a bit at a time. You explore questions, and answer them, a bit at a time giving the student the opportunity to develop mentally first, than physically to match. What did Mr. Parker say, "I'd rather face a guy who learned a thousand different techniques, than a guy who practiced a single technique a thousand times." Why? because "It's more important to be able to choose the right solution to a problem, then to have all the answers and not know which one to use right now." - Dr. Chapél The type of training he does gives you lots of questions to consider, but how to get students to choose the right answer when they need it, is another story. He may be "special," he may even have "special knowledge" but the human body works one way, no matter how he feels about it.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

 

[Josh Oakley]

Quote from thesemindz in said thread:

I think a lot of times the argument comes from Ras not coming up in a more "traditional" version of the EPAK system. For instance, this is his new video for a technique he teaches as Attacking Twins.

I see a good solid technique there. But it's not anything new to me. It's an Attacking Mace entry to a Clinch/Knee combination. Two simple beginner techniques grafted together. Now, I'm sure people will point out that he's "doing it wrong." But the reality is that he's just doing it differently. If he called this technique Delayed Sword and told us all how it was better than the Delayed Sword we do, there'd be some understandable frustration because A. It looks absolutely nothing like my Delayed Sword, and B. My Delayed Sword works just fine thank you very much. But none of that means that his Attacking Twins doesn't work, just that it's not my Delayed Sword. I think that's the basis for most of the arguments Ras has on these forums. It's a communication breakdown, and it's always the same. Other than that he seems to be mostly saying that kenpo practitioners aren't doing enough live training with their material, which I tend to agree with.


-Rob

Doc's response:

Nope. Flawed, and MAY not get pass the first punch.

Ras's response to Doc:

Interesting. Worked pretty good against pro boxers, kickboxers, street hoods and criminals. But I'm down to learn if you're down to teach. Flawed in what way?

Doc's response to Ras:

Well, clearly my observations must be flawed, and I have nothing to share with those who already have all the answers. I will save you the "me too." You do seem to have a lot more confrontations than I ever have/do, so .. But for the record, if you really want to know, you probably should refrain from telling everyone how great you are, just before you ask them to tell you what's wrong. Your cup runneth over, and you have precious little room for what little I might contribute sir. "You've been horned."

Copypasta copypasta copypasta, I know, but I think it is relevant.

 

[MJS]

Disagree. Many of the techs not only have multiple applications that you don't begin to grasp until you practice them vs resistance, but many of the techs are also mirror images of each other...and require you to do the mirror image in a different scenario. There's a 5 Swords kind of flow to, for instance, Heavenly Ascent. You're learning the multiple applications of that one movement and how it applies to multiple scenarios; multiple attacks. You learn multiple applications not just for a specific sequence but multiple applications to a specific kind of flow of movement. When you add resistance? You learn this lesson much earlier, and you realize that Kenpo simultaneously stimulates your mind and expands your movement vocabulary in very specific ways. Synergistic ways. You can perceive and amplify the quality of movement of other arts accordingly and very rapidly. Kenpo imo is very similar to Functional Capoeira in that regard.

"Not every movement is a technique but every technique is a movement. You have to train your mind to move your body with better quality. The more quality movements you get..the better anything you do in the martial arts becomes. That's how you improve organically and synergistically."--Frank Shamrock to me, when he was based out of the RAW Center

But, I still stand by what I've said before....there is already, IMHO, way too much in the system. By taking a technique and trying to make it work not only for the attack its designed for, but also 10 other attacks, is crazy. Now, I've taken Attacking Mace, and worked some of the ideas in that tech, against a rt. cross. But thats pretty much it. I'm not working it against a kick, a grab, a take down, attempted takedown, a mount escape, etc.

I'm not denying that you develope basic techs and keep it KISS, but man...we're talking about training paradigms and training preferences, not how an art itself can perform. For instance, if you keep picking up and dumping a Kenpo guy or a Tai Chi guy on their heads, or slamming them and choking or locking the holy crap out of them, eventually they will adapt their art to that scenario and eventually they will be able to give you close combat on the ground.

The process is much faster, much simpler, and imo smarter if they go to a good Judo or Hapkido or bjj or submission wrestling or catchwrestling school which will provide you with tools right away. I did. But I didn't go in there to become a better judoka or a better hapkidoka, a better wrestler and jits man [ although I achieved all of the above ]. Nope. I came in there to become a better martial artist. I specifically looked for ways and training methods that could inform my striking with grappling that strikers were unprepared for, inform my grappling with striking that grapplers were unprepared for, and I looked to outstrike strikers and outgrapple grapplers and outstrike, outgrapple, and out duel weaponeers.

Cross training is GREAT. Vital. Important. Imho at any rate. But at no time does the current state of affairs regarding Kenpo reflect what we know its historical roots are...which are shared by bjj. Kenpo's historical roots go back to kenpojujutsu, if I'm not mistaken. And so do bjj's. The training emphasis of jujutsu was largely removed and redirected toward standup combat, and that is what denuded our current Kenpo of intricate grappling skill. The more that Kenpoists train in international Judo, Hapkido, and bjj? The more material they have to add back into Kenpo's matrix, and the more knowledge and skill they have to adapt their tech rich base to their new skill sets...and the more they appreciate Kenpo. Because the foundational base for all of that stuff is still in Kenpo. The converse claim cannot be made [ except for Hapkido, which is an art that is very much slept on imo ].

The only other system that I have really pursued in depth, other than Kenpo, is Arnis. BJJ....to be honest, I'm not interested in 50 mount escapes. I'd rather learn a handful of things, drill the **** out of them, and move on. IMO, and I'm going to ask Doc this question, but I'd wager a guess that alot of the ground stuff that used to be there or was taught by Mr. Parker, is either no longer there or grossly changed.

 

[ATACX GYM]

It has Joe Louis listed as the author. Until either of actually reads the book, I will assume be wrote it.

But your point is not disagreed with. You don't have to know how to explain something to be able to do it, and I don't think anyone is actually arguing against it, Ras.

It is, however, irrelevant. Doing something is different than TEACHING something. When we are talking about being able to DEVELOP a technique and EXPLAIN it, we are talking about TEACHING.

And a good TEACHER understands and can explain those mechanisms.

I am NOT saying that you aren't a good teacher, or that you can't explain your stuff.

I merely pointed out that Joe Louis wrote a book. Reacting one freaking statement doesn't invalidate your whole freaking argument. Don't just try and correct me when you obviously haven't read the freaking book either. Don't freaking preach to me about the low literacy rate of blacks at the time as if I didn't already freaking know.

Until you pick up the book, there is no harm about admitting you MIGHT be wrong about ONE freaking point. It doesn't discredit you, it doesn't invalidate your arguments. It shows you have academic and intellectual freaking INTEGRITY.

If you haven't guessed, I am mildly peeved.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

I guessed. Maybe I overreacted. I accidentally lumped your quote in with another quote I was reading. Misread your intentions. Apologies.

 

[Twin Fist]

this:

Yeah Ras went through the same thing over here as well. He doesn't do EPKK, that is clear. What he doesn't get is he insists on using the terminology and technique names, while giving many the impression he is fixing EPKK. His teaching method from a systemic perspective is also extremely flawed, and there is a great deal of knowledge he doesn't have. He sees what he does as just a series of technique movements, and insists we don't understand him and puts up a bunch a videos that confirm what we already know, that many before him have done - with the same amount of success. But, everyone has to be comfortable in their method, and the smart figure out when it is no good - eventually - ​I hope.

pretty much ends this discussion.

 

[Twin Fist]

and if that doesnt, this DOES:

Well, clearly my observations must be flawed, and I have nothing to share with those who already have all the answers. I will save you the "me too." You do seem to have a lot more confrontations than I ever have/do, so .. But for the record, if you really want to know, you probably should refrain from telling everyone how great you are, just before you ask them to tell you what's wrong. Your cup runneth over, and you have precious little room for what little I might contribute sir. "You've been horned."


Say goodnight Gracie....