Sword and hammer pt. 1 and 2

[jks9199]

Link us to the quote. Show the actual quote where I say that everyone else's kenpo sucks but mine. I mean leave a link by clicking the quote number. Should be easy to do if I am, as you claim, "...KNOWN for it." One link, one quote, will do.

I say categorically and know for a fact that such quotes DON'T and WILL NEVER exist. John, merely produce the quote and you will have made your position ironclad. If you fail to produce the quote? You have given the Fatality to every claim by you and anyone else who stated I said that everyone's kenpo sucks but mine, and you could out me as a liar to boot.

Such a quote does not exist, and never did exist...outside of the minds of my detractors.

Ras, while you may not have outright said everyone else's kenpo sucks, you have most definitely conveyed the perception that you believe it. You've repeatedly stated "I'm the only one who gets it", described other versions as "craptastic", and generally demeaned many of those who have attempted to discuss this with you. I'm not going to dig through the 20+ pages to pull out examples.

Maybe it's a communication failure; written words often lose nuances in tone of voice and body language. But it's very much the message you've sent.

 

[MJS]

Agreed. Principles, concepts, craft your own response...test your response against escalating resistance. functionality.

I never said everyone else's Kenpo sucks but mine. No such quote exists. I freely challenge and invite my detractors to find a quote of mine where I said such a thing. If they can't? Then they should refrain from making such claims, and all on this thread who see them say such a thing should call them to order for their false claims.

I directly contradicted anyone who claimed that there is a Sword and Hammer Ideal TECHNIQUE that we Kenpoists must slavishly adhere to, and anything that doesn't closely resemble the more popular expression of Sword and Hammer tech is perforce not Sword and Hammer. Chris Parker, Twin Fist, and others have energetically disagreed. I produced the literal definition of The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Process from Mr. Parker, quotes from Doc Chapel and The Tracys themselves which proved resoundingly that:

1. There is no Sword and Hammer Ideal TECHNIQUE, contrary to the claims of my detractors and exactly as I stated [ and I freely admit that it was Doc Chapel who corrected me as I am correcting my detractors ]. There is ONLY the Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Process. PROCESS. It is defined as follows:

"(p.66) IDEAL PHASE- This is Phase I of the analytical process of dissecting a technique.
It requires structuring an IDEAL technique by selecting a combat situation that you wish to analyze. Contained within the technique should be fixed moves of defense,offense, and the anticipated reactions that can stem from them. This PHASE strongly urges the need to analyze techniques from THREE POINTS OF VIEW..."

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...d-and-hammer-pt-1-and-2&p=1466741#post1466741



2. Therefore there is no mandate to copy anybody else's expression [ however popular ] in Sword and Hammer. The only constraints are the use of the handsword, hammerfist, Kenpo concepts and principles, etc. in the resolution of the specific common streetfighting scenario that is being analyzed [ starting with but not limited to, in this case, the flank grab and threatened punch ]

3. The tech that my detractors find combat value in is actually devoid of combat value as it wasn't meant to be a combat model; per Mr. Parker [ as quoted from Mr. Parker's own manuals by Doc Chapel ] these techs were merely loose guidelines to help instructors fashion THEIR OWN Sword and Hammer Ideal for ONLY THEIR OWN schools. Yes, we were all SUPPOSED TO HAVE DIFF EXPRESSIONS OF SWORD AND HAMMER

4. The mandate of training Sword and Hammer vs multiple attacks predates the birth of Motion Kenpo and EPAK; Mr. Parker himself used THE SAME DEFENSE VS MULTIPLE ATTACKS--exactly as I do--as did The Tracys. This is part of the concepts passed down to Mr. Parker by Professor Chow and Osensei Oshita, and Mr. Parker called this training method 50 Ways To Sunday. Therefore I am merely using a method that was preapproved by everyone from Mr. Chow to Mr. Parker. Apparently, that is not sufficient enough approval for my detractors. It is for me.

http://www.kenpokarate.com/

Since he doesnt seem to post here anymore, I'm going to have to go to KT, start a thread and ask Doc myself, because a) I want to know the answer and b) I've asked here, and I dont believe I've seen an answer that really satisfied me. So that said....I'm curious:

1) Does Doc teach the techs that we'd see in Big Red? ie: the same techs that we see in 99.99% of all of the other Kenpo schools out there.

2) Why do 99.99% of all the schools out there, do the same techs?

3) At what point does Doc allow his students to drift from what we see in 99.99% of the other Kenpo schools? What about Tatum?

4) Asked this a while ago, dont recall an answer. Lets say that Ras is right, that Parker wanted everyone to craft their own response. So, that said, what happens when Larry Tatum coes to town to do a seminar. You're going to have say 4 different Kenpo schools at the seminar, with every single one, doing a different version. So, how is Larry supposed to teach anything? What're the students going to say, "No Mr. Tatum, you're wrong. Thats not how S&H is done."

I'd really like to see some answers to these simple 4 questions.

IMHO, the way I was taught, and perhaps it was the wrong way, who knows, but anyways...I was taught the techs the same way we'd see them in Big Red, on Casa De Kenpo, etc. I use them as a platform to give the students examples. However, I tell them repeatedly, not to be bound by them, that there are other options, that THEY should be figuring out, should the tech that I showed, decides to go south.

I wonder...maybe Kenpo would be better off if it was like Kaju and not so technique based. Seems that that is the main issue...that we have so many God damn techs in the system, plus the 'extensions' which make up all the more. Hundreds upon hundreds of techs, that the die hards say we have to drill into ourselves.

 

[MJS]

Challenge to my critics and detractors:

1. Prove to me using Kenpo concepts, principles, definitions, etc. that my technique isn't Sword and Hammer.

2. Prove where how why and when the most common version of Sword and Hammer that you champion is even a combat model, has been approved as such by Mr. Parker, and should be the standard for all subsequent Sword and Hammers to uphold.

Failure to do either of these two simply destroys any and all validity whatsoever to any and every atom of your counterarguments.


Waiting.

1) I'd say its not the S&H that we see in 99.99% of the schools out there.

2) Looks like Parker set everyone up to fail then...well, except those that were privy to the "real deal Kenpo" that a select few seem to have been concerned with. Again, 99.99% of the schools out there, all teach the same version, so I take it that they're all wrong? If the S&H that we see everywhere, isn't a combat model, what about the rest of the techs? Do they suck as well? If so, then again, it proves that Parker set people up to fail.

Sorry, giving someone a platform to build from, but that supposed platform is faulty, well, why teach it in the first place then? If all the techs suck, if none are combat ready, well....you all know what I'm saying here.

 

[MJS]

I cant help but wonder if the poor Moderators are still reading this. Trying to gauge intent and effect must be hell

In any case, I think Josh was onto something with the circular nature of Ras Explanations.

Oh, we're still reading...well, at least I am.

 

[MJS]

That's not actually what I was asking, though Mike... I understand the naming conventions, they make a lot of sense (certainly a lot more than quite a number of the naming conventions in some of my systems, ha!), what I was asking was what defines Sword and Hammer to Ras? He mentions needing to preserve the use of a handsword and hammerfist, which to me implies that he has some criteria for a technique to be Sword and Hammer in the first place, as well as using many examples of other peoples expression of the technique, which he puts up against his own.

My question is what does Ras think needs to be there for it to be Sword and Hammer? That's it. If it's just the use of swordhand and hammerfist, fine... but I think that means he misses the majority of the lessons present.



Right. I've held off on saying this as long as I can, but dude, you really are either willfully ignorant of what's been said, no matter how often I've said it, or you're a complete idiot. Let's examine, shall we?

You put up three videos all showing the same basic technique (some variation, but all recognisably the same thing) as the baseline form of Sword and Hammer. Whether or not there is a "standard" form, you have demonstrated, in the first goddamn post, that there is a basic form given to Sword and Hammer (or Pin Step Chop, or whatever other name it's given), and that form has a range of standard elements that are present and consistent.

You then, inexplicably, put up a couple of videos claiming that they showed the attacks that these forms of Sword and Hammer were designed to "thwart". Except they weren't. As was immediately pointed out by myself, and seconded by others. Just because you don't get it doesn't change the simple fact that a technique designed against a grab, pull, and threatened punch is not designed against a blindside haymaker with no grab or pull. Already you've shown a lack of understanding of the very technique you're deriding.

Finally, you show a completely unrelated technique, against yet a third attacking form, ignoring every lesson of the forms that you have already used to set a baseline (in other words, used as "standard" yourself). When it is pointed out that there is no relationship between the two techniques (your Sword and Hammer, and the one you yourself presented as the baseline, or standard form), you have gone on a bizarre rant about there not being a standard (which goes against your premise in the beginning of the thread), and when asked to demonstrate why you feel yours is a version of the former versions, you have, in 27 pages, shown no indication of even understanding the question itself.

I'll put it bluntly. Your technique is Sword and Hammer for your version of Kenpo. It is not a "better" version of the one you are lambasting. It is not even a version of the one you are lambasting. That is the goddamn point.

And dude, "the sooner we can dispense with comparing my expression to a standard which does not exist"... the reason we're comparing your version with the one you presented as a baseline version is because you presented them to be compared, you compare them in your own videos, this entire thread is about comparing them! What the hell is wrong with you?!?!

By the way, what really sinks you is this:



Particularly the bold.



You don't have detractors, you're not that important. Critics, I'll give you. Personally, I think you just don't get it. But, for the record....

1: There's no need to use Kenpo principles to prove anything, the point is that you include no aspects of the base technique you provide. Kenpo principles be damned, really, if it isn't the same technique (same or similar movement, same or similar tactics, same or similar approach, same or similar strategies), it isn't the same technique. Never has anyone said what you've come up with isn't Kenpo, what has been said is that it is so removed from the technique you want it compared to that it is no longer able to be seen as the same technique. In other words, it is not the same technique in any way, shape, or form. All you've done is keep the name.

2: A combat model? Who said it was? I even postulated a better way for you to approach it that says it isn't one. Approved by Ed Parker? How about approved in his organisation later, that would account for the name (EPAK), yeah? As far as "standard", a quick google search turned up many videos and many descriptions all of which follow the same principles, ideas, tactics, strategies, and more. So to take the term "standard" as "typical", or "common", well, just look around.

And Ras, we're not championing it, we're just saying that you don't get it, and your technique is not a version of it in the same way that a car is not a different version of a bus... or motorbike.

Failure to understand this argument simply shows you to have no clue whatsoever about the structure of techniques.

And grow up in your language, you sound like a 15 year old, full of self importance, with no sense of reality around him. I'm fed up reading it, and I feel that others are too (as they've basically said as much to you privately, and on the thread itself).

I just have 2 things to say:

1) Regarding my take on what I thought you were asking...lol...yeah, looks like I may've misunderstood you. To be honest, I never really gave the question much thought, though it is a good question you asked.

2) From a non Kenpo point of view, in your opinion, what do you feel are the lessons presented in the standard S&H?

 

[ATACX GYM]

Ras, while you may not have outright said everyone else's kenpo sucks, you have most definitely conveyed the perception that you believe it. You've repeatedly stated "I'm the only one who gets it", described other versions as "craptastic", and generally demeaned many of those who have attempted to discuss this with you. I'm not going to dig through the 20+ pages to pull out examples.

Maybe it's a communication failure; written words often lose nuances in tone of voice and body language. But it's very much the message you've sent.

You guys are projectting your mispercerptions upon my comments. I have never deliberately demeaned anyone who's attempted to discuss matters with me. I have never said a contrary word about you,jks9199. And as I stated before? If the quotes and accusations that my detractors attribute to me don't physically exist? Then they're constructs of my detractors' own minds...and I should be absolved of any guilt for the internal mental workings of my detractors mindsets.

When I said ANYTHING like "I'm the ony one who gets it"...I wasn't referring to the quality of anyone else's Kenpo. I freely offer to produce the relevant quotes and links for any doubters. I was referring to The Ideal Phase and my detractors' comprehensive misunderstanding of same.

My detractors routinely return to their apparently perpetual belief that there is such a thing as an Ideal Phase TECHNIQUE [ that each SD sequence has an Ideal that it must slavishly copy, and "such and such tech" is only valid and right and good insofar as how accurately it reflects a noncombat Model. ] They continue to hew to this position despite the fact that Mr. Parker specifically didn't want a standard tech to exist, Doc Chapel has quoted Mr. Parker about the process and spoke about it at length himself, and I've been paraphrasing and quoting the founder and Supreme Grandmaster as well as the ranking Kenpo Elder and Senior onsite about this matter since literally page 1. Even The Tracys confirm my positions, an we know that unity and unanimity amongst our Kenpo Elders about ANY subject is a rare thing. Lol.

Therefore I was being direct factual and truthful: I was most definitely the only one who got it.

My position hasn't changed an atom from what I first said, as my position came from and is in full alignment with [ insofar as I know ] the position of the above Masters on this matter [ we may disagree on others ]. In order for my detractors to "get it"? They too must align their position fully with the foregoing Masters and our one and only true Grandmaster Mr. Parker. Insofar as any of my detractors referencing The Ideal Phase TECHNIQUE or any form of universal standard in that regard, or me training my single tech vs multiple stimuli as being a whole new tech or indicative of my lack of understanding of Kenpo? They are factually and historically refuted at every turn by the Elders who crafted this standard from Mr. Chow to The Tracys.

As I stated to Chris Parker, when I use the terms "craptastic" "dooficity" etc these are tongue-in-cheek phrases. Where I'm from, these phrase are FUNNY, they're clearly not demeaning or insulting. As I said to Chris Parker in this very thread...if you're offended? Right here and right now I offer you and anyone else so offended an apology; I really wasn't trying to offend. When I am purposefully trying to offend? You'll know.

Perhaps a portion of this misunderstanding IS "a communication failure" as you hypothesize.

 

[ATACX GYM]

1) I'd say its not the S&H that we see in 99.99% of the schools out there.

2) Looks like Parker set everyone up to fail then...well, except those that were privy to the "real deal Kenpo" that a select few seem to have been concerned with. Again, 99.99% of the schools out there, all teach the same version, so I take it that they're all wrong? If the S&H that we see everywhere, isn't a combat model, what about the rest of the techs? Do they suck as well? If so, then again, it proves that Parker set people up to fail.

Sorry, giving someone a platform to build from, but that supposed platform is faulty, well, why teach it in the first place then? If all the techs suck, if none are combat ready, well....you all know what I'm saying here.

1) You're right. It's not supposed to be. Imho it's crystal clear that 99.9% of schools out there have no idea how to really do The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Process.

2) Mr. Parker didn't set everyone up to fail. Doc delved deeply into this answer and gave most of the relevant details to satisfy your questions. Believe me, I plied Doc with questions and I must've annoyed him too...but he answered me until I got it. And now that I get it? I spread the word.

I completely think it's reasonable to hypothesize that Mr. Parker did one thing while most of Kenpo did something else...exactly as Bruce did with JKD.

I absolutely do NOT think that the techs of Kenpo in and of themselves suck in any way. Kenpo is a dazzling self defense form. There are many maaanny valuable lessons to be learned when you combine accurate info that Mr. Parker left us with an absolute focus on functional performance [ that mandates lots of scrappin mat time, folks ]. Just this year, Doc Dave helped me out with my GATHERING CLOUDS, allowing me to target a point that I'd never gun for before. Crazy benefits instantly sprung therefrom.

It boils down to this:

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

 

[Josh Oakley]

But now I WILL say this thread is circular.

I read the thread all over again, and want that hour of my life back. Here is what I saw that it seems all the main players agree on, but don't seem to want to AGREE to agree on:

1. The technique Ras posted is good, and valid.
2. The technique Ras posted is Kenpo.
3. The technique Ras posted is not EPAK. (Ras did not say it was EPAK, and in fact stated he learned the technique originally outside of EPAK.)
4. The technique is not the EPAK Sword and Hammer.
5. The technique has both a handiwork and a hammer fist. (This was for the MOST PART agreed upon. There were a couple of comments to the contrary, but very few.)

And even though this is all agreed upon, and there are many cases where both people agree, posters will say the exact same thing, though using slightly different words. I don't get it. Ras and Twin Fist, you two are the worst offenders on this point.

Now as far as IP goes... Ras did indeed quote Doc when he said there is no Ideal Phase technique. Verbatim. And very early on. So if he is wrong about this, it is because Doc is wrong about this. He also quoted how the NOTION of an ideal phase technique came about. From Doc. So again, if he is wrong, it is because Doc is wrong.

Now as to people saying he is claiming he does kempo the right way and everybody else is wrong, well no, he never claimed that... Specifically. But his use of hyperbole sure makes it easy to think so. VERY easy. And there was one point early on where yes, he did indeed say that he was right and everyone who agreed with his detractors is wrong. It was the post where he quoted Doc as his supporting evidence.

And frankly, I disagree with the use of the words "right" and "wrong" in the context he used it. Decades after Parker has passed on, his first and second generation black belts can't seem to fully agree on quite a lot of points, one being IP. Doc's words carry quite a lot of weight... But they are not the gospel law.

As far as most kempo schools being wrong about something, even something as basic as a core philosophy... Frankly, it is possible. EPAK, from what I have heard, was the commercial product. And it is not the same kempo he taught to his core students, supposedly. I have read Doc say something these lines, I have heard Jeff Speakman say something similar, I have seen similar quotes from a number of other kempo names, etc. I am not too.g to post all the references. Look them up for yourself if you actually care. The point is, though, that if the commercial product is what is taught in a vast amount of schools, al, it is possible that a vast amount of schools are doing it wrong. I won't postulate as such, but it is a distinct possibility, and one some people on this thread seem to dismiss far too easily.

And if you are going to jump on Ras for a word using a word... FREAKING KNOW WHAT IT FREAKING MEANS! "Detractor" means "one who disparages someone or something". Yes Ras has detractors. A couple of people here are indeed detractors. Twin Fist, your side comment about Ras not being important enough to have detractors was nonsensical. To disparage someone or something literally means to regard of represent it as being of little worth. You have done that repeatedly. Hell, regardless the level of Ras's importance or lack thereof, the very act saying he is "not important enough to have detractors" makes you, by the very definition of the word, A FREAKING DETRACTOR!!!!!

(Though you were one long before that)

Ras is using the word correctly.


But Ras, a couple of criticisms you have received really are valid, and painfully clear:

1. You promote yourself far too heavily. It doesn't come off as humble. It makes you look very, very bad.you may be proud of your students and your gym. That is great. But the way you present it and yourself comes off as very, VERY pompous. And it detracts from your points.

2. Your hyperbole and verbosity needlessly conflate the whole discussion. You make yourself very hard to read.

3. Chris has a valid point: your first post is a comparison between the commonly accepted Sword and Hammer, and your technique. Steering people away from such comparisons flatly contradicts your first post.

Granted, I might be wrong about that. Maybe it is not what you intended in the first place. But if I AM wrong, it is because you didn't make it easy to understand you. Your communication style muddies the waters. You don't see it because it is clear to YOU. But if you step outside yourself and read it outside of your own understanding... You'll see it. Enough people have brought this problem up now that it really does deserve a fair hearing.


There are other things that annoy me about this thread. But this is post is already pretty long.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

 

[ATACX GYM]

Since he doesnt seem to post here anymore, I'm going to have to go to KT, start a thread and ask Doc myself, because a) I want to know the answer and b) I've asked here, and I dont believe I've seen an answer that really satisfied me. So that said....I'm curious:

1) Does Doc teach the techs that we'd see in Big Red? ie: the same techs that we see in 99.99% of all of the other Kenpo schools out there.

2) Why do 99.99% of all the schools out there, do the same techs?

3) At what point does Doc allow his students to drift from what we see in 99.99% of the other Kenpo schools? What about Tatum?

4) Asked this a while ago, dont recall an answer. Lets say that Ras is right, that Parker wanted everyone to craft their own response. So, that said, what happens when Larry Tatum coes to town to do a seminar. You're going to have say 4 different Kenpo schools at the seminar, with every single one, doing a different version. So, how is Larry supposed to teach anything? What're the students going to say, "No Mr. Tatum, you're wrong. Thats not how S&H is done."

I'd really like to see some answers to these simple 4 questions.

IMHO, the way I was taught, and perhaps it was the wrong way, who knows, but anyways...I was taught the techs the same way we'd see them in Big Red, on Casa De Kenpo, etc. I use them as a platform to give the students examples. However, I tell them repeatedly, not to be bound by them, that there are other options, that THEY should be figuring out, should the tech that I showed, decides to go south.

I wonder...maybe Kenpo would be better off if it was like Kaju and not so technique based. Seems that that is the main issue...that we have so many God damn techs in the system, plus the 'extensions' which make up all the more. Hundreds upon hundreds of techs, that the die hards say we have to drill into ourselves.

Okay, I'm the renegade ATACX GYM, but I recall Doc's answers to most of these. Please understand that the real depth detail and juice is in Doc's answers to this stuff, but I can off top give you what I know...which is a [ more shallow than what Doc has given and could give but still functional and solid ] answer to the above. Here they are short and sweet:

1] Doc doesn't do Motion Kenpo

2] Doc answered this numerous times already. Mr. Parker's a freakin genius, the other BB from non-Kenpo arts who he recruited in order to promote the commercial vehicle known as Motion Kenpo lacked the [ brainpower real world experience integrity fighting skill will energy character take your choice ] to grasp what he was trying to convey via Big Red; and once they became succcessful? You couldn't correct them you could only guide them because this is a BUSINESS not just an art. They killed much of the art; the business is going gangbusters.

3] Doc doesn't do Motion Kenpo. Idk if Tatum does but it looks like he does...maybe you should ask Clyde.

4] You're SUPPOSED TO have a wealth of FUNCTIONAL approaches to S&H. The idea is that you learn a variety of skills and that you promote an environment wherein constant improvement, refinement, and innovation is not only welcomed...IT'S THE NORM. Like say...bjj guys go to multiple gurus to learn all kinds of different Guard techs, setups, and refinements of their game in every position. They don't think: "OH, JEAN JACQUE MACHADO IS WRONG AND RICKSON IS RIGHT." No. They say..."Both of these Masters are magnificent, I will learn both,maybe fuse them together and tweak the material that I'm able to grasp so that I can use what's best for myself."

Orrrr the prospective student could think...

"I think that my gifts are more suited toward how Jean Jacque does stuff with his open guard as opposed to Rickson's pressure game, so I'll combine that with the stuff that my current sensei is teaching me". i

Ya know. Something like that. Plus, every single meet and greet with a fellow NON-master Kenpoist would be like a sneak peek into what that guy's instructor would teach. Rolling with say a student of one of Clyde's black belts would be sorta like a mini snapshot of what this particular BB did with his/her own innovations drawn from Clyde's base material.

This is what I kept referring to when I spoke of Mr. Parker's idea being a titanic stroke of genius far beyond the scope of the foolish mortals of his time. Remember, karate and kungfu were still virtually unknown in the 60s and was only just gaining steam on an international level when Mr. Lee passed.

 

[ATACX GYM]

But Ras, a couple of criticisms you have received really are valid, and painfully clear:

1. You promote yourself far too heavily. It doesn't come off as humble. It makes you look very, very bad.you may be proud of your students and your gym. That is great. But the way you present it and yourself comes off as very, VERY pompous. And it detracts from your points.

2. Your hyperbole and verbosity needlessly conflate the whole discussion. You make yourself very hard to read.

3. Chris has a valid point: your first post is a comparison between the commonly accepted Sword and Hammer, and your technique. Steering people away from such comparisons flatly contradicts your first post.

Granted, I might be wrong about that. Maybe it is not what you intended in the first place. But if I AM wrong, it is because you didn't make it easy to understand you. Your communication style muddies the waters. You don't see it because it is clear to YOU. But if you step outside yourself and read it outside of your own understanding... You'll see it. Enough people have brought this problem up now that it really does deserve a fair hearing.


There are other things that annoy me about this thread. But this is post is already pretty long.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

First? helluva post. agree with most of it. I'm only highlighting these four because I just got off the phone with my GM. He drilled me for what amounts to point #2 on your quote and laughed alot then drilled me on the point under the point you make as #3.

"...It's clear to YOU because you have lots more experience in many areas than do they...WHICH MEANS YOU'RE LOTS MORE RESPONSIBLE FOR BEING AS CLEAR AS POSSIBLE IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE LIKELIHOOD OF THEIR MISCOMPREHENSION OF YOUR QUOTES. You ARE intelligent and experienced enough to make your position transparent, honest direct and uncompromising without donning the gear of arrogance,Ras..." --My GM and Uncle, Bobby "SPIDER-MAN" Thomas...friend and contemporary of Doc Chapel and many other luminaries.

1. Not promoting myself; never intended to. Not in this thread, anywho. I live in LBC CA. None of you guys do. You're not coming to my Gym so what do I care? Lolol. If it comes off that way? Then I'll be more clear as to both my intentions AND my word selection. Recall, I don't have much experience with or regard for martial arts politics. I don't know and Idc about that stuff. I will, however, try to do a better job of being mindful of what other people may think regarding this subject.

2. Voice inflection. I debate alot face to face and I ride off of body language, voice inflection, connotation, etc. In some threads and some forums, I can throw too much too fast at people because I'm used to doing that face to face and it's not hard to grasp. I supposed--incorrectly--that with the written word my position should be easier to grasp as the reader has the opportunity to read and reflect at their leisure. I was wrong.

2a--as I have often said, I'm replying to a much broader audience than the small group of my detractors. I have been repeatedly contacted by members of the silent majority who read this thread. I try to incorporate their questions and concerns in my answers. This leads directly to what you call my verbosity...and yeah, maybe I should pare it down.

3. The purpose of me bringing up the noncombat model S&H was not for what people would assume it was. That was deliberate on my part. I already knew the info I proceeded to impart, and I knew that most others didn't. I looked to inform those who didn't know. I knew there would be debate, but I looked at these debates as extended "teachable moments" where we all could learn. I knew that if people stayed focused only upon the physical elements of my tech and only contrast it with the physical elements of the nonstandard noncombat model, we would be stuff debating mechanics without real meaning and soul. Too many Kenpoists are masters of esoteric Kenpo-ese but couldn't fight off a single piece of dry toilet paper. I feared if I allowed this conversation to devolve into those depths, the REAL lessons regarding The IP and stuff [ which I learned from our Kenpo Elders ] would be lost.

These lessons are, imo, absolutely CRUCIAL to Kenpoists worldwide, and essential to how Kenpo is practiced and perceived. I think that there is considerable reason to believe that the current state of affairs results in a condition inimical to Kenpo's possibilities of evolving into a highly respect, devastating, functional, alive and evolving self-defense form. That's just my opinion, but I know I'm not alone in that regard.

I didn't know we would be involved in THIS KIND of debate...but we all have learned and stuff. So overall? We're in the clear.

Couldn't be there without people like you, though Josh.

 

[Josh Oakley]

"...It's clear to YOU because you have lots more experience in many areas than do they...WHICH MEANS YOU'RE LOTS MORE RESPONSIBLE FOR BEING AS CLEAR AS POSSIBLE IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE LIKELIHOOD OF THEIR MISCOMPREHENSION OF YOUR QUOTES. You ARE intelligent and experienced enough to make your position transparent, honest direct and uncompromising without donning the gear of arrogance,Ras..." --My GM and Uncle, Bobby "SPIDER-MAN" Thomas...friend and contemporary of Doc Chapel and many other luminaries.

Pretty similar to what I told you on private messages...

1. Not promoting myself; never intended to. Not in this thread, anywho. I live in LBC CA. None of you guys do. You're not coming to my Gym so what do I care? Lolol. If it comes off that way? Then I'll be more clear as to both my intentions AND my word selection. Recall, I don't have much experience with or regard for martial arts politics. I don't know and Idc about that stuff. I will, however, try to do a better job of being mindful of what other people may think regarding this subject.

I meant promotion in the same sense that Cassius Clay promoted himself, ie. Talked himself up. Not in the marketing sense. I should have clarified that.

2. Voice inflection. I debate alot face to face and I ride off of body language, voice inflection, connotation, etc. In some threads and some forums, I can throw too much too fast at people because I'm used to doing that face to face and it's not hard to grasp. I supposed--incorrectly--that with the written word my position should be easier to grasp as the reader has the opportunity to read and reflect at their leisure. I was wrong.

Lesson learned. Written communication is a far different beast than verbal communication.

2a--as I have often said, I'm replying to a much broader audience than the small group of my detractors. I have been repeatedly contacted by members of the silent majority who read this thread. I try to incorporate their questions and concerns in my answers. This leads directly to what you call my verbosity...and yeah, maybe I should pare it down.

Frankly, you should stop that.

First, replying to an audience is non-sensual. The audience isn't who is asking questions or making rebuttals. INDIVIDUALS are. When an individual says something to you and you reply TO an audience, that crap grates on the nerves.

Second, the "silent majority" represents an unquantifiable number of people. There is no way to verify how many people that is. But in reality, the audience is tertiary. There are twelve people in this discussion.

The people who are not joining in the discussion should be encouraged to do so.



Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

 

[ATACX GYM]

My question is what does Ras think needs to be there for it to be Sword and Hammer? That's it. If it's just the use of swordhand and hammerfist, fine... but I think that means he misses the majority of the lessons present...



Right. I've held off on saying this as long as I can, but dude, you really are either willfully ignorant of what's been said, no matter how often I've said it, or you're a complete idiot. Let's examine, shall we?..

You put up three videos all showing the same basic technique (some variation, but all recognisably the same thing) as the baseline form of Sword and Hammer. Whether or not there is a "standard" form, you have demonstrated, in the first goddamn post, that there is a basic form given to Sword and Hammer (or Pin Step Chop, or whatever other name it's given), and that form has a range of standard elements that are present and consistent...

I'll put it bluntly. Your technique is Sword and Hammer for your version of Kenpo. It is not a "better" version of the one you are lambasting. It is not even a version of the one you are lambasting. That is the goddamn point...

And dude, "the sooner we can dispense with comparing my expression to a standard which does not exist"... the reason we're comparing your version with the one you presented as a baseline version is because you presented them to be compared, you compare them in your own videos, this entire thread is about comparing them! What the hell is wrong with you?!?!...

By the way, what really sinks you is this:

Originally Posted by ATACX GYMJust some--not all--of the Kenpo Principles that I see in my Sword and Hammer and even some in the more common expression are:


Particularly the bold...



2: A combat model? Who said it was? I even postulated a better way for you to approach it that says it isn't one. Approved by Ed Parker? How about approved in his organisation later, that would account for the name (EPAK), yeah? As far as "standard", a quick google search turned up many videos and many descriptions all of which follow the same principles, ideas, tactics, strategies, and more. So to take the term "standard" as "typical", or "common", well, just look around...

And Ras, we're not championing it, we're just saying that you don't get it, and your technique is not a version of it in the same way that a car is not a different version of a bus... or motorbike...

Failure to understand this argument simply shows you to have no clue whatsoever about the structure of techniques...

And grow up in your language, you sound like a 15 year old, full of self importance, with no sense of reality around him. I'm fed up reading it, and I feel that others are too (as they've basically said as much to you privately, and on the thread itself).

I wasn't going to answer this post at first, but...

"My question is what does Ras think needs to be there for it to be Sword and Hammer? That's it. If it's just the use of swordhand and hammerfist, fine... but I think that means he misses the majority of the lessons present."--Chris Parker.

No. You're the one who misses the relevant factors, as I have cited Mr. Parker's definition of The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Process, and answered this question already multiple times.

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...d-and-hammer-pt-1-and-2&p=1466741#post1466741

"You put up three videos all showing the same basic technique (some variation, but all recognisably the same thing) as the baseline form of Sword and Hammer. Whether or not there is a "standard" form, you have demonstrated, in the first goddamn post, that there is a basic form given to Sword and Hammer (or Pin Step Chop, or whatever other name it's given), and that form has a range of standard elements that are present and consistent..."--Chris Parker

No you're incorrect. The 3 other videos of the more common expression of Sword and Hammer--which is a noncombat model, a guideline which was NEVER supposed to be a hard and fast technique per Mr. Parker himself--are the direct results of lack of understanding or even use of The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique PROCESS.

Those other folks' videos embody the misunderstanding which has torpedoed much of Kenpo in that too many Kenpoists conflate the noncombat model with some fictional nonexistent universal standard of execution. The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique PROCESS is NOT some form of master key method that helps you arrive to a specific physical articulation of a technique. The Ideal Phase is equivalent to The Scientific Method. You use it and the integrity of the process of your technique selection and application is beyond dispute. Your conclusions ARE valid..whether or not other scientists agree that your findings are final or not.

Mine follows the Ideal Phase Analytical Technique PROCESS.

"I'll put it bluntly. Your technique is Sword and Hammer for your version of Kenpo. It is not a "better" version of the one you are lambasting. It is not even a version of the one you are lambasting. That is the goddamn point..."--Chris Parker

I've only been saying that my Sword and Hammer is my Ideal for my Gym and AN Kenpo Idea for 20+ pages prior to you finally grasping the point and finally getting a glimmer of understanding. So, if I'm a idiot yet I've tumbled to a conclusion 20+ pages before you did and kept arguing that point until you finally saw the light that I knew of before I made the thread...then what does that make you? Just curious...

"And dude, "the sooner we can dispense with comparing my expression to a standard which does not exist"... the reason we're comparing your version with the one you presented as a baseline version is because you presented them to be compared, you compare them in your own videos, this entire thread is about comparing them! What the hell is wrong with you?!?!..."--Chris Parker

The reason this entire thread exists is because people like you who have no clue of what the REAL Ideal Phase Analytical Technique PROCESS is...have no clue of what the REAL Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Process IS. And you're militant in your ignorance.


"By the way, what really sinks you is this:

Originally Posted by ATACX GYMJust some--not all--of the Kenpo Principles that I see in my Sword and Hammer and even some in the more common expression are:


Particularly the bold..."--Chris Parker

I see principles in the more common version, but...let's compare The Ideal Phase Process to the quadratic equation for this instance. Seeing the more common noncombat model Sword and Hammer is like seeing somebody skim over the quadratic formula and then misuse it. I recognize what's being ATTEMPTED, but I see that it's doomed to fail and why...because I use the Quadratic Equation properly and I'm good at math. Or in keeping with The Scientific Method metaphor [ the Scientific Method very briefly is the process of: Observation, Hypothesis, Experimentation, Conclusion ]? The more common version lacks Experimentation, therefore its conclusions are ALWAYS invalid.

": A combat model? Who said it was? I even postulated a better way for you to approach it that says it isn't one. Approved by Ed Parker? How about approved in his organisation later, that would account for the name (EPAK), yeah? As far as "standard", a quick google search turned up many videos and many descriptions all of which follow the same principles, ideas, tactics, strategies, and more. So to take the term "standard" as "typical", or "common", well, just look around..."--Chris Parker

The purpose of The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Process is to give rise to give rise to functional, viable combat models grounded in Kenpo principles.Who said it was a combat model? Mr. Parker did. You failed to grasp that...even after 20+ pages of me telling you so and providing quotes from Doc and Mr. Parker on the matter.

EPAK is a business acronym which came about after Mr. Parker's death. He did NOT approve of the acronym or the process which gave rise to this so-called Ideal Phase Technique stuff. The authors of the source material flatly refute and contradict you at every turn, sir...which makes you wrong. Period.


"And Ras, we're not championing it, we're just saying that you don't get it, and your technique is not a version of it in the same way that a car is not a different version of a bus... or motorbike...

Failure to understand this argument simply shows you to have no clue whatsoever about the structure of techniques...

And grow up in your language, you sound like a 15 year old, full of self importance, with no sense of reality around him. I'm fed up reading it, and I feel that others are too (as they've basically said as much to you privately, and on the thread itself)"--Chris parker

Yes you were championing it, yes I do get it you don't get it, my technique is a version of Sword and Hammer, yes I do know quite a bit about the structure of techniques...and if I'm linguistically a 15 year old then, Chris...

...I'd rather be linguistically a 15 year old who has a thorough grasp of the material and overmastered you with it then someone who you approve of linguistically and is as completely and totally incorrect as consistently as you have been. Btw, this linguistic 15 year old managed to overmaster your position completely and publically without resorting even infrequently to invectives. You cannot make such a claim.

 

[MJS]

Okay, I'm the renegade ATACX GYM, but I recall Doc's answers to most of these. Please understand that the real depth detail and juice is in Doc's answers to this stuff, but I can off top give you what I know...which is a [ more shallow than what Doc has given and could give but still functional and solid ] answer to the above. Here they are short and sweet:

Ok

1] Doc doesn't do Motion Kenpo

Over at Kenponet, there is an article by Doc on what SL4 and Motion Kenpo is/is not. Yes, Doc does SL4. So, what does Doc do tech. wise? Does he teach Delayed Sword, 5 Swords, etc? If not, again,what does he do? If he does, what does he do different?

2] Doc answered this numerous times already. Mr. Parker's a freakin genius, the other BB from non-Kenpo arts who he recruited in order to promote the commercial vehicle known as Motion Kenpo lacked the [ brainpower real world experience integrity fighting skill will energy character take your choice ] to grasp what he was trying to convey via Big Red; and once they became succcessful? You couldn't correct them you could only guide them because this is a BUSINESS not just an art. They killed much of the art; the business is going gangbusters.

Am I reading/understanding this right Ras...that Parker grabbed BBs from non Kenpo arts, and had THEM promote Kenpo? Jesus, that'd be like me testing in front of a baord of TKD instructors. WTF do they know about Kenpo? No more than I'd know about TKD! So once again, proof that the almighty dollar is more important than quality. Go figure...lol. But, this really didnt answer my question. Are you telling me Ras, that all those non kenpo guys, just happened to make all their S&Hs, look the same?

3] Doc doesn't do Motion Kenpo. Idk if Tatum does but it looks like he does...maybe you should ask Clyde.

I know, but this isn't answering my question. When does Doc allow his students to drift? I get the impression from a post of his, that its not for a loooong time.

4] You're SUPPOSED TO have a wealth of FUNCTIONAL approaches to S&H. The idea is that you learn a variety of skills and that you promote an environment wherein constant improvement, refinement, and innovation is not only welcomed...IT'S THE NORM. Like say...bjj guys go to multiple gurus to learn all kinds of different Guard techs, setups, and refinements of their game in every position. They don't think: "OH, JEAN JACQUE MACHADO IS WRONG AND RICKSON IS RIGHT." No. They say..."Both of these Masters are magnificent, I will learn both,maybe fuse them together and tweak the material that I'm able to grasp so that I can use what's best for myself."

This isnt' answering my question Ras. Yes, I know enough about BJJ to know there're numerous mount escapes. My point is that if Roy Harris showed one, chances are, Rickson would do the same or something very similar with little to no change, such as I suggested a few posts back when I was talking about training with various Arnis students.

 

[ATACX GYM]

Ok



Over at Kenponet, there is an article by Doc on what SL4 and Motion Kenpo is/is not. Yes, Doc does SL4. So, what does Doc do tech. wise? Does he teach Delayed Sword, 5 Swords, etc? If not, again,what does he do? If he does, what does he do different?



Am I reading/understanding this right Ras...that Parker grabbed BBs from non Kenpo arts, and had THEM promote Kenpo? Jesus, that'd be like me testing in front of a baord of TKD instructors. WTF do they know about Kenpo? No more than I'd know about TKD! So once again, proof that the almighty dollar is more important than quality. Go figure...lol. But, this really didnt answer my question. Are you telling me Ras, that all those non kenpo guys, just happened to make all their S&Hs, look the same?



I know, but this isn't answering my question. When does Doc allow his students to drift? I get the impression from a post of his, that its not for a loooong time.



This isnt' answering my question Ras. Yes, I know enough about BJJ to know there're numerous mount escapes. My point is that if Roy Harris showed one, chances are, Rickson would do the same or something very similar with little to no change, such as I suggested a few posts back when I was talking about training with various Arnis students.

In order of your questions, my answers are:

"Over at Kenponet, there is an article by Doc on what SL4 and Motion Kenpo is/is not. Yes, Doc does SL4. So, what does Doc do tech. wise? Does he teach Delayed Sword, 5 Swords, etc? If not, again,what does he do? If he does, what does he do different?"--MJS

The best person to ask about Doc's techs and curriculum is Doc himself. There are some vids of Doc just killin it on youtube. This is him doing Delayed Sword and Snapping Twig

[video=youtube_share;OPe2692PsM8]http://youtu.be/OPe2692PsM8[/video]

"Am I reading/understanding this right Ras...that Parker grabbed BBs from non Kenpo arts, and had THEM promote Kenpo? Jesus, that'd be like me testing in front of a baord of TKD instructors. WTF do they know about Kenpo? No more than I'd know about TKD! So once again, proof that the almighty dollar is more important than quality. Go figure...lol. But, this really didnt answer my question. Are you telling me Ras, that all those non kenpo guys, just happened to make all their S&Hs, look the same? "--MJS

Yes, Mr. Parker recruited alot of nonKenpo BBs to help spread the art and business model of Motion Kenpo. Read Doc's posts on the matter...it's enlightening. As for how these S&Hs wound up looking the same? I spent much of this thread answering that question using quotes from Doc and Mr. Parker's quotes. Many of those guys didn't grasp The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Process...and they didn't grasp what was being specified in Big Red. Goodbye brilliant stuff that Mr. Parker had planned for us, hello Kenpo mediocrity...which made stupid shovels of cash.

"I know, but this isn't answering my question. When does Doc allow his students to drift? I get the impression from a post of his, that its not for a loooong time."--MJS

When does Doc allow drifting from the curriculum he wrote? Gotta ask him. He might not answer that one directly, though, or in deep detail. But yeah I think he very deliberately has crafted his curriculum that presents no wiggle room for lower belts for very specific reasons [ skill and basics development ]. He goes into the reasons why with pretty sufficient detail without once revealing the specifics of his curriculum and its progressions...and that's cool with me.

"This isnt' answering my question Ras. Yes, I know enough about BJJ to know there're numerous mount escapes. My point is that if Roy Harris showed one, chances are, Rickson would do the same or something very similar with little to no change, such as I suggested a few posts back when I was talking about training with various Arnis students"--MJS

Then we have different experiences on this matter. I've been to numerous seminars and each one was different. The teachers all had different takes on the same material and the differences made a notable difference. I bet if you put Doc, Speakman, Tatum, Clyde, Doc Dave innahouse, and the presenters at he Kenpo Ohana in the same room and had them hold forth on some tech...each one would show stuff significantly different enough about their approach that you would note it and differentiate it from other teachers. Not just minor changes, either.

Doc showing Delayed Sword

[video=youtube_share;m971DEjJPy8]http://youtu.be/m971DEjJPy8[/video]

Casa de Kenpo Delayed Sword

[video=youtube_share;8VlfNS7AHMY]http://youtu.be/8VlfNS7AHMY[/video]


Dr. Dave Crouch innahouse showing you stuff you don't know about 5 Swords and Orbits

[video=youtube_share;_QjuQS-kLGo]http://youtu.be/_QjuQS-kLGo[/video]


Functional 5 Swords pt. 1

 

[ATACX GYM]

Doc Dave showing you some more stuff you don't know about Repeating Mace


[video=youtube_share;05_Q7OPxGlA]http://youtu.be/05_Q7OPxGlA[/video]


Flaming Fist Repeating Mace

[video=youtube_share;W_8JgHJLwvo]http://youtu.be/W_8JgHJLwvo[/video]

You should get the point now...but for those who don't?

ROY HARRIS PASSING GUARD

[video=youtube_share;ZbC_Z1XyU30]http://youtu.be/ZbC_Z1XyU30[/video]

MARCELO GARCIA PASSING GUARD

 

[MJS]

In order of your questions, my answers are:

"Over at Kenponet, there is an article by Doc on what SL4 and Motion Kenpo is/is not. Yes, Doc does SL4. So, what does Doc do tech. wise? Does he teach Delayed Sword, 5 Swords, etc? If not, again,what does he do? If he does, what does he do different?"--MJS

The best person to ask about Doc's techs and curriculum is Doc himself. There are some vids of Doc just killin it on youtube. This is him doing Delayed Sword and Snapping Twig

Yeah, I'll have to head over to KT and ask.

[video=youtube_share;OPe2692PsM8]http://youtu.be/OPe2692PsM8[/video]

"Am I reading/understanding this right Ras...that Parker grabbed BBs from non Kenpo arts, and had THEM promote Kenpo? Jesus, that'd be like me testing in front of a baord of TKD instructors. WTF do they know about Kenpo? No more than I'd know about TKD! So once again, proof that the almighty dollar is more important than quality. Go figure...lol. But, this really didnt answer my question. Are you telling me Ras, that all those non kenpo guys, just happened to make all their S&Hs, look the same? "--MJS

Yes, Mr. Parker recruited alot of nonKenpo BBs to help spread the art and business model of Motion Kenpo. Read Doc's posts on the matter...it's enlightening. As for how these S&Hs wound up looking the same? I spent much of this thread answering that question using quotes from Doc and Mr. Parker's quotes. Many of those guys didn't grasp The Ideal Phase Analytical Technique Process...and they didn't grasp what was being specified in Big Red. Goodbye brilliant stuff that Mr. Parker had planned for us, hello Kenpo mediocrity...which made stupid shovels of cash.

Sad, really, really, REALLY sad! Still not sure why you'd give someone a crash course and expect them to know what the **** is going on. Its like the blind leading the blind Ras, it really is.

"I know, but this isn't answering my question. When does Doc allow his students to drift? I get the impression from a post of his, that its not for a loooong time."--MJS

When does Doc allow drifting from the curriculum he wrote? Gotta ask him. He might not answer that one directly, though, or in deep detail. But yeah I think he very deliberately has crafted his curriculum that presents no wiggle room for lower belts for very specific reasons [ skill and basics development ]. He goes into the reasons why with pretty sufficient detail without once revealing the specifics of his curriculum and its progressions...and that's cool with me.

Oh..so, I may not get a straight answer? Kinda defeats the purpose doesnt it? Anyways, I'll ask.

"This isnt' answering my question Ras. Yes, I know enough about BJJ to know there're numerous mount escapes. My point is that if Roy Harris showed one, chances are, Rickson would do the same or something very similar with little to no change, such as I suggested a few posts back when I was talking about training with various Arnis students"--MJS

Then we have different experiences on this matter. I've been to numerous seminars and each one was different. The teachers all had different takes on the same material and the differences made a notable difference. I bet if you put Doc, Speakman, Tatum, Clyde, Doc Dave innahouse, and the presenters at he Kenpo Ohana in the same room and had them hold forth on some tech...each one would show stuff significantly different enough about their approach that you would note it and differentiate it from other teachers. Not just minor changes, either.

Note that I said little change. Sure, of course, Tatum, Palanzo, Planas all in a room together, yeah, you'd probably see some subtle differences, but my point is, you'd be able to look at that and say, "Yup, he's doing (insert any tech here)" It would be fairly recognizeable I'd imagine. If everything was so different, then again, at a seminar, nobody would remotely be on the same page. You'd spend 3/4 of the class reteaching just so everybody would know what the hell was going on...lol.

And since we're posting clips...

[yt]XvsRavUJ9O0&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLB521BAB42789E259[/yt]

[yt]2iB5nlIeZR8[/yt]

Gee...looks the same to me. Subtle differences? Sure, possibly, but again, you have 2 very similar things, which if people from each respective school, were all at the same damn seminar, those things would look the same and be recognizeable by all there.

 

[Twin Fist]

Qfmft

and grow up in your language, you sound like a 15 year old, full of self importance, with no sense of reality around him. I'm fed up reading it, and i feel that others are too (as they've basically said as much to you privately, and on the thread itself).

 

[Twin Fist]

Twin Fist, your side comment about Ras not being important enough to have detractors was nonsensical.

I didnt say that, Chris Parker did.

 

[Twin Fist]

your uncle told you you were smart?

he lied.

And claiming a "silent majority" support you?...oh yeah, hey, Allah called me, he thinks you suck.

see? claiming support that cant be proven? sort of teenage-ish


i want this month of my life back.

this guy isnt good enough to learn anything from.

 

[Cyriacus]

your uncle told you you were smart?

he lied.

And claiming a "silent majority" support you?...oh yeah, hey, Allah called me, he thinks you suck.

see? claiming support that cant be proven? sort of teenage-ish


i want this month of my life back.

this guy isnt good enough to learn anything from.

...Month?
Are You kidding Me?

*Checks*
*Closes Tab*