Techniques on both sides?

[kenpo3631]

If Ed Parker didn't want the 2nd sets (or the 1st for that matter) to be taught as part of his American Kenpo curriculum, then why are they included as requirements?

If you read my previous post I stated in my reply...

if you wanted you could use the Equation Formula to alter Kicking Set #1 by prefixing or suffixing hand strikes or Stance Set #1 by having the student use complimentary angles with thier hands instead of having them place thier hand upon thier hips, heck why not just do plain ole' step through foot maneuvers while executing various hand strikes or kicks, you'd essentially achieve the same result

I agree the #1 Sets have value & will continue to stick with my belief that Mr. Parker knew most students do not enjoy working basics, what better way to get them to practice their basics than by requiring them to learn sets.

Please don't say for marketing purposes or just to give people what they want.

Why is this theory so hard to swallow for people? It has been posted on this forum numerous times, and I have heard it from talking to "Seniors" & 1st Generation students that the Yellow Belt material evolved as a "Beginners Course", why is it that the belt requirements were chopped from 32 per belt to 24 and even 16? Were the examples I've given not done for commercial reasons? Was Mr. Parker not an business man selling the Art of Kenpo Karate? I never implied that Mr. Parker allowed the #2 Sets in to his system to as you put "to give people what they want" I feel he would never do that, but rather as a way for students to highlight and practice thier basics.

If the argument is that it is material that really has little benefit to a Kenpo practitioner, I couldn't disagree more.

It is my belief that you get out of it what you put into it. I know the extensions and I also teach them and yes some of the stuff adds information into the system. As far as I know in the first teaching manuals, American Kenpo was divided into four belt groups: Orange Belt, Purple Belt, Blue Belt, and Green Belt. Each of these groups were comprised of a number of basics, forms and/or sets, and 32 self-defense techniques (thus the term: "32-Technique System"). In addition to these four groups, Mr. Parker used a Green-Orange group which consisted of adding extensions to each of his 32 Orange Belt techniques. That is, in the original system compiled by Mr. Parker, there were only extensions for his Orange Belt techniques. If you apply this to the 24 Technique layout it covers the 24 Orange Techniques & the first 8 Purple Belt Techniques.

I have also been told in discussions that in time the belt colors were expanded to: Yellow, Orange, Purple, Blue, Green, 3rd Brown, 2nd Brown, 1st Brown, and Black (with a total of ten degrees). To have enough material to teach within each of these new belt groups, the original 32-Technique System was divided into the 24-Technique System. To complete the number of techniques required by the belt groups some of Mr. Parker's students pulled motion out of Forms 4, 5, and 6 and created techniques such as: Circling Windmills, Reversing Circles, and Circling The Storm. Of note, these movements were not originally designated by Mr. Parker to be considered as techniques. For example, Circling The Storm was created to complete a category of various checks that could be applied to hinges and joints of the body. When a student discovers this knowledge, the Circling The Storm motion can be run with equal effectiveness on the front or back of an opponent's body. As further evidence of this new interpretation of Mr. Parker's original motion, Circling The Storm does not follow his weapon protocol of "Divert, Seize, Control, and Disarm." In addition to new self-defense techniques, new forms and sets were also necessary to complete a teaching structure for the new system. As in the creation of the new techniques, some of Mr. Parker's students compiled various sets such as the Striking Set, Stance Set, and Kicking Set. In time, each of these sets would come to have a #2 version (e.g., Blocking Set #2). Since these sets were not created by Mr. Parker, he was only minimally aware of their content.

The extensions, for example, provide a "what-if" to us should the ideal phase go wrong. There are also many fighting applications to the sets.

My point is - There is so much to learn within the core of the system aside from the original "Orange-Green" extensions, many of the extensions only repeat what is already taught and add nothing new. If you learn the core system then most of the "what-if" counters are taught to you. I also believe in what Doc already posted...

One's man junk is another's treasure. As long as a person finds value then who's to say its not?

If you find more value in the 2nd Sets and Extensions than by all means run with it. I can only say is that we seem to agree to disagree on the subject.

 

[Doc]

If you read my previous post I stated in my reply...

I agree the #1 Sets have value & will continue to stick with my belief that Mr. Parker knew most students do not enjoy working basics, what better way to get them to practice their basics than by requiring them to learn sets.

Why is this theory so hard to swallow for people? It has been posted on this forum numerous times, and I have heard it from talking to "Seniors" & 1st Generation students that the Yellow Belt material evolved as a "Beginners Course", why is it that the belt requirements were chopped from 32 per belt to 24 and even 16? Were the examples I've given not done for commercial reasons? Was Mr. Parker not an business man selling the Art of Kenpo Karate? I never implied that Mr. Parker allowed the #2 Sets in to his system to as you put "to give people what they want" I feel he would never do that, but rather as a way for students to highlight and practice thier basics.

It is my belief that you get out of it what you put into it. I know the extensions and I also teach them and yes some of the stuff adds information into the system. As far as I know in the first teaching manuals, American Kenpo was divided into four belt groups: Orange Belt, Purple Belt, Blue Belt, and Green Belt. Each of these groups were comprised of a number of basics, forms and/or sets, and 32 self-defense techniques (thus the term: "32-Technique System"). In addition to these four groups, Mr. Parker used a Green-Orange group which consisted of adding extensions to each of his 32 Orange Belt techniques. That is, in the original system compiled by Mr. Parker, there were only extensions for his Orange Belt techniques. If you apply this to the 24 Technique layout it covers the 24 Orange Techniques & the first 8 Purple Belt Techniques.

I have also been told in discussions that in time the belt colors were expanded to: Yellow, Orange, Purple, Blue, Green, 3rd Brown, 2nd Brown, 1st Brown, and Black (with a total of ten degrees). To have enough material to teach within each of these new belt groups, the original 32-Technique System was divided into the 24-Technique System. To complete the number of techniques required by the belt groups some of Mr. Parker's students pulled motion out of Forms 4, 5, and 6 and created techniques such as: Circling Windmills, Reversing Circles, and Circling The Storm. Of note, these movements were not originally designated by Mr. Parker to be considered as techniques. For example, Circling The Storm was created to complete a category of various checks that could be applied to hinges and joints of the body. When a student discovers this knowledge, the Circling The Storm motion can be run with equal effectiveness on the front or back of an opponent's body. As further evidence of this new interpretation of Mr. Parker's original motion, Circling The Storm does not follow his weapon protocol of "Divert, Seize, Control, and Disarm." In addition to new self-defense techniques, new forms and sets were also necessary to complete a teaching structure for the new system. As in the creation of the new techniques, some of Mr. Parker's students compiled various sets such as the Striking Set, Stance Set, and Kicking Set. In time, each of these sets would come to have a #2 version (e.g., Blocking Set #2). Since these sets were not created by Mr. Parker, he was only minimally aware of their content.

.
Very well stated sir. Mr. Parker knew the core of any system is its basics. He also knew it was the least attractive part of the "business" of teaching kenpo, and "packaged" product to keep least motivated students interested, and "around." I was there when the business kenpo most practice was born, and I also know why Parker made a significant shift to "making money" out of a personal necessity. It is also during this period Parker stopped teaching classes on a regular basis.

I also would remind some once again, that the 32 "technique curriculum" was the beginning of the commercial system, but not the genesis of Ed Parker's Kenpo nor what he personally practiced. Although he believed his business model served its purpose, and gave many what they needed, he always cautioned students "There is a lot to learn." and this was just the beginning of what should be a lifelong lesson of "continuing education."

He also knew the majority of these students would come in and maybeget a belt, and move on to somethinge else and be completely satisfied with what they learned and the money they spent. He created the least demaning model he could, with the instructors responsible for the quality of the students, and the attrition rate was still through the roof. The majority of his students went to a certain level and stopped.

Most never taught or produced student black belts of their own. Many in the business got lots of stripes but Parker always reminded them, "Just because the red show, don't mean that you know." I wonder who people thought he was talking about? Everyone laughed and thought he was talking about some other group. When asked about the business curriculum, he would always say, "How do you do it?" "If that works for you, than do that."

He created this "tailoring concept" for the business knowing you can't tailor basics, but never assigned value to what students liked and wanted. Yes in many cases, he gave students exactly what they wanted, as any good businessman would do. But while doing so always told students, "There's always so much more."

Yes the "Yellow" was created after the fact to retain students who were dropping out because it was taking too long to get promoted. So, Parker made it "easier" to get that first promotion to keep students. Orange came next, and Blue Belt came later. The first colored belt was purple to green then brown. Before that, you went from white to brown to black. That's why when other belts were added the 32 technique stopped essentially at green, with only the restored second half of the now "orange" techniques called "extensions" to get to brown, with no black belt material at all.

He knew "kenpo-karate" was a "business" first and an "art" second, and that it was successful in what it was designed to do, and he never ripped anyone off. He also knew it for it was worth and he himself did not practice it because he was at a higher level. The depth of his knowledge was only conceptually represented in that model and his teachings, and it was contrary to how he himself was taught. He knew that all students would seek their own level, and that for 98% of them, it wouldn't be very high. Most only wanted belts and stripes, and once they got them, they moved on.

 

[Rich_Hale]

Dear Sloth,

Drop me a note somewhere around 2nd Brown and tell me if you are not indeed a "born again" right handed fighter.

A good friend of mine is left-handed, so I asked Mr. Parker why we are so right-hand dominate and he said we could change our art to work for the left handed defender, but he could do nothing about the right handed attacker.

In other words, the best defense for a right punch is still a right inward block, no matter if you are left, or right, handed.

Mr. Parker knew that most attackers (most people) are right handed, so our defenses are not based on most of us being right handed, but in that most attackers are right handed.

Now, is this carved in stone, and can you not find an exception to the rule?

Take care my friend, and when no one is expecting it . . . blast them with an awesome left.

 

[TwistofFat]

Mr. Hale,


Just to add my two cents. I trained for years with a Chiropractor in Pittsburgh who was a lefty and he struggled with Kenpo until Green-ish. After a few years of x-training hands, he is now one of the best fighters I know (I have a broken nose as evidence...). Sloth - stick with it.

Regards - Glenn.

 

[Kenpo-Sloth]

:asian: Thanks!!
The more I train, the more my right and left strikes are becomming equal (equally bad of course :lol: ).
Mr. Hale, Sir, I've only been training for a year and a half, but I think your "right", after another 5 years or so, I'll be a right hander (finally I can get a baseball catcher's mit!! ).
Mr. Glenn, Sir, I'll stick with it, so far my biggest advantage has been sparring, I'm still kind of slow, but I'm at home on both sides and change up constantly.
Thanks for supporting us leftys in an "if your not right your wrong" world.

 

[KenpoKidZ]

I truly beleive it is important to train techniques on both sides provided you understand why your doing it.

I have to go with Clyde on this one, most all kenpo systems are right side dominant for good reason...but there are around 100 or so out of 700 techniques that are done on the left side in most every kenpo system.

Training for being ambidextrous is just fine, just remember that you should want the power strike/strikes to come out of your dominant side.

I am left handed, well more so ambidextrous, but more powerful on my left. I have always done my techniques as taught to me on the right side with no problem but retain the fact that I can flip the "tech" when needed. I think that is one aspect that many kenpoists' neglect when they train. Keep your power side dominant: but always have the option of flipping the technique when you need to. Training both sides will prevent you from "locking up" if an attack occurs that presents problems for your dominant side. I hope that makes sense.



Good Day

Zach Atkins

 

[Doc]

Kenpo is a "right handed" defense approach simply because the world is predominantly right handed. When training is based on body mechanics, instead of abstract motion, lefties have no problem with the information. I have several in class regularly and one is a police offcer. They have expereinced no more discomfort than any other beginner with our right handed sysytem. In fact, they had not given it a thought until I mentioned it to them.

Kenpo utilizes right and left hand defenses, however the brain is wired such that Mr. Parker understood that there is no true ambidexterity, and the idea is to be able to use both left and right side effectively, but they do not have to be used in the exact same way. A "Five Swords" type attack, and a "Shielding Hammer" attack are mirror images attacks, that both utilize defensively the right side. But "Attacking Mace" utilizes a defensive left for a right punch while "Reversing Mace" uses a defensive right. Taught properly the methodology is balanced correctly. Don't bog yourself down attempting to be ambidextrous, or performing techniques equally on both sides. Not only is it an impossibility, it is an inefficient use of very limited time to absorb voluminous amounts of information and skills. Concentrate on being effective to matter what an attacker throws at you. This is about self-defense, not a gymnastics routine unless busy work is your thing, or you don't have enough to learn so you need to "mirror" up everything.

 

[Seabrook]

Don't bog yourself down attempting to be ambidextrous, or performing techniques equally on both sides. Not only is it an impossibility, it is an inefficient use of very limited time to absorb voluminous amounts of information and skills. Concentrate on being effective to matter what an attacker throws at you. This is about self-defense, not a gymnastics routine unless busy work is your thing, or you don't have enough to learn so you need to "mirror" up everything.

Agreed 100%.

Well stated Mr. Chapel.

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com

 

[MJS]

Reviving this thread for our newer members.

Mike

 

[MJS]

Any more thoughts on this?? I realize that in the forms, we address the left side but IMO, I think it would be a good idea to take a few of the techniques that we have that only address the right side and train them on the left.

Mike

 

[Flying Crane]

personally, I do practice techniques on both sides. I understand that true ambidextrous may be impossible, but I think it is a good idea to practice both sides for a couple of reasons.

The first is that you never know when or if your dominant side might be taken out of action for some reason. This could be due to an injury either prior to a conflict, or during the conflict. This could force you to have to fight with your weaker side.

Your strong side could be taken out of use due to positioning, especially if you are caught by surprise. It may be impossible to bring your strong side into the fight quickly enough to be useful. In these cases, I think it is good to have developed some muscle memory and some skill with the techniques on the weaker side. Understandably your skill on the weak side will probably never match your skill on the strong side, but I think it makes sense to develop this skill nevertheless.

Another reason to practice both sides can have to do with physical anatomy. If you exercise excessively on one side of the body and don't match it on the other, you can develop unevenly. In extreme cases this can lead to spinal problems and can be debilitating. While this is more prevalent in practices like bodybuilding where there is a focused attempt to alter the shape and size of the body, it can manifest in other forms of exercise as well. For example, tennis players can develop unevenly due to always playing with the racket in the same hand. My chiropractor sees this kind of problem often enough to take notice. He even notices this in people in the business world who always carry their briefcase in the same hand. Without some other form of exercise, over time, this can be enough to develop problems. He always told me that I had even physical development and he felt it was due to my training in the martial arts.

An extreme example of this is Quazimoto from the Hunchback of Notre Dame. The character of Quazimoto was a Welsh Bowman. The Welsh Longbow (which became the English Longbow) had a draw weight of 100# to 150#. A bowman was a professional soldier who practiced daily with his longbow, but of course they always shot with the same side. Over time, the muscles in the shoulder, back and arm become severely overdeveloped on one side, leading to a hunched back. While Quazimoto of course was not a real person, his character was given a real profession and his physical attributes reflected that profession.

 

[Doc]

personally, I do practice techniques on both sides. I understand that true ambidextrous may be impossible, but I think it is a good idea to practice both sides for a couple of reasons.

The first is that you never know when or if your dominant side might be taken out of action for some reason. This could be due to an injury either prior to a conflict, or during the conflict. This could force you to have to fight with your weaker side.

Your strong side could be taken out of use due to positioning, especially if you are caught by surprise. It may be impossible to bring your strong side into the fight quickly enough to be useful. In these cases, I think it is good to have developed some muscle memory and some skill with the techniques on the weaker side. Understandably your skill on the weak side will probably never match your skill on the strong side, but I think it makes sense to develop this skill nevertheless.

Another reason to practice both sides can have to do with physical anatomy. If you exercise excessively on one side of the body and don't match it on the other, you can develop unevenly. In extreme cases this can lead to spinal problems and can be debilitating. While this is more prevalent in practices like bodybuilding where there is a focused attempt to alter the shape and size of the body, it can manifest in other forms of exercise as well. For example, tennis players can develop unevenly due to always playing with the racket in the same hand. My chiropractor sees this kind of problem often enough to take notice. He even notices this in people in the business world who always carry their briefcase in the same hand. Without some other form of exercise, over time, this can be enough to develop problems. He always told me that I had even physical development and he felt it was due to my training in the martial arts.

An extreme example of this is Quazimoto from the Hunchback of Notre Dame. The character of Quazimoto was a Welsh Bowman. The Welsh Longbow (which became the English Longbow) had a draw weight of 100# to 150#. A bowman was a professional soldier who practiced daily with his longbow, but of course they always shot with the same side. Over time, the muscles in the shoulder, back and arm become severely overdeveloped on one side, leading to a hunched back. While Quazimoto of course was not a real person, his character was given a real profession and his physical attributes reflected that profession.

Clearly sir, you did not read my previous post. All of the negatives you suggest are negated in the system WITHOUT mirror image training of individual techniques.

 

[Flying Crane]

Clearly sir, you did not read my previous post. All of the negatives you suggest are negated in the system WITHOUT mirror image training of individual techniques.

Actually, I did read your previous post. Unfortunately, since the kenpo I practice is Tracy based, I am unable to follow your examples. I am unfamiliar with the names of the techniques you list, and don't know how they may be the same as, or differ from, what I practice. Unfortunately for me, this removes much of what I might have been able to get from what you have stated.

I definitely agree with the points you make about the impossibility of complete ambidextrousness (is that a real word?). I also agree with your point about using both hands, but they aren't necessarily used in the same way. I agree that focus should be on the dominant side as this will always be the most effective side. However, for my reasons stated above, I maintain that it is worthwhile to spend some time training techniques on the weak side. Just my opinion, but I will agree to disagree.

 

[Doc]

Actually, I did read your previous post. Unfortunately, since the kenpo I practice is Tracy based, I am unable to follow your examples. I am unfamiliar with the names of the techniques you list, and don't know how they may be the same as, or differ from, what I practice. Unfortunately for me, this removes much of what I might have been able to get from what you have stated.

I definitely agree with the points you make about the impossibility of complete ambidextrousness (is that a real word?). I also agree with your point about using both hands, but they aren't necessarily used in the same way. I agree that focus should be on the dominant side as this will always be the most effective side. However, for my reasons stated above, I maintain that it is worthwhile to spend some time training techniques on the weak side. Just my opinion, but I will agree to disagree.

Duly noted sir, and yes, that is a real word.

 

[Dark Kenpo Lord]

Actually, I did read your previous post. Unfortunately, since the kenpo I practice is Tracy based, I am unable to follow your examples. I am unfamiliar with the names of the techniques you list, and don't know how they may be the same as, or differ from, what I practice. Unfortunately for me, this removes much of what I might have been able to get from what you have stated.

I definitely agree with the points you make about the impossibility of complete ambidextrousness (is that a real word?). I also agree with your point about using both hands, but they aren't necessarily used in the same way. I agree that focus should be on the dominant side as this will always be the most effective side. However, for my reasons stated above, I maintain that it is worthwhile to spend some time training techniques on the weak side. Just my opinion, but I will agree to disagree.

To opt to practice all on the opposite side may rob you of time, and of seeing more of your art from the dominant side perspective.

And though ambidextrousness is a word, the preferred is ambidexterity.

DarK LorD

 

[Flying Crane]

And though ambidextrousness is a word, the preferred is ambidexterity.
DarK LorD

aahhh, ambidexterity. That's the word I was looking for!

 

[Flying Crane]

I have also been told in discussions that in time the belt colors were expanded to: Yellow, Orange, Purple, Blue, Green, 3rd Brown, 2nd Brown, 1st Brown, and Black (with a total of ten degrees). To have enough material to teach within each of these new belt groups, the original 32-Technique System was divided into the 24-Technique System. To complete the number of techniques required by the belt groups some of Mr. Parker's students pulled motion out of Forms 4, 5, and 6 and created techniques such as: Circling Windmills, Reversing Circles, and Circling The Storm. Of note, these movements were not originally designated by Mr. Parker to be considered as techniques.

I may be misunderstanding what is being said here, so I am asking for some clarification.

When a kata is created, it is made up of techniques that already exist. The movement is useful and has meaning, and is put within the context of a kata as a way of cataloguing the information. The above statements indicate to me that the opposite is true, and that these kata were created from random movement, and people later devised useful applications for the movement. I don't think this is even possible.

Whether or not someone learning a form understands the movement is a different story. I can't believe the creator of a form would not understand the application of the movements, however.

I know forms 4 and 5, but not 6, 7, or 8. I do know that forms 4 and 5, as well as short and long 3, were created from techniques that already existed. I believe short and long 2 were as well, but perhaps not as systematically as the others. Also, if you look at those techniques, the movements are way too specific and precise for me to believe that they were once just randomly put together without understanding what they were for. Clearly the movement had meaning, and was included in the forms for that very reason. I don't think it would even be possible to create a worthwhile form from purely random movement, as the above statements seem to imply.

If I have misunderstood what was said, please help me with some clarification.