The Original Curiculum of Kajukenbo/Karazenpo

[Karazenpo]

-

 

[Karazenpo]

Gotta agree with him:


2005, 02:32 AM
scfgabe
Martial Talk
Yellow Belt
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ogden, Utah
Art and Rank : American Kenpo; Beginner
Posts: 25

Re: Kenpo in the 21st Century

Every Martial Art inherently evolves over time because it is an art that is passed on through an instructor/student relationship. Each instructor will make subtle (or sometimes drastic) changes as they teach based on their preferences, no matter how organized or strict the curriculum may seem.

 

[tshadowchaser]

Folks please forgive me for going off topic but I must say that reading this thread has been a pleasure. Much good information has been given and passed and for the most part everyone has been polite and respectful.
This thread and threads like it are the reason this forum was founded.
Keep up the good work

Sheldon

 

[Danjo]

Danjo, the farther from the source one goes, the more dilution of the original art you have, which could be good, could be bad, but one thing is for certain, it's not the original art. Then again, you won't find any totally original art out there today period, in any system, due to the human factor of change which creates individual stylistic differences. Look at the older traditonal systems, on the Karate section of this forum someone had posted that at a tournament they saw Bassai performed four radically different ways. Here's what I can tell you from personal experience as far as KGS goes. Sonny Gascon, KGS's fouinder, taught George Pesare and George Pesare taught Nick Cerio who in turn taught Fred Villari and the rest is history. Villari left Cerio in '71 before the advent of Nick Cerio's Kenpo. The Shaolin Kempo Villari taught up to black belt level, actually around 2nd dan (Villari made up to 2nd under Cerio but parted ways before the completion of his one year probation, so he's listed as a shodan in one of Cerio's books) is a mildly modified version of Karazenpo, after that Villari's Kempo took a strong Kung Fu twist which started with the form Sho Tung Kwok. Hansuki was adopted from the Chow/Chun connection of Goshinjitsu Kai Chinese Kempo. Swift Tigers was inspired by Pesare's #7 kata, other than that, it's all Villari's system at that point. Anyone who made black belt in Shaolin Kempo the 70's and even the early 80's and possibly a little beyond, has about as close as you're going to come outside of going back to George Pesare. I will venture to say the Villari schools probably still teach the same curriculum to black belt as they did in the 70's but I'd have to check. I first studied at Gm. Pesare's school in 1978, all original forms and Pesare's original 21 combinations were included in the Villari curriculum with very little modification and I'll even go back to circa. 1960, for I have sen old black & white films of this early Karazenpo first from Prof. Cerio in 1992 and later (2003), a different film from Gm. Pesare. Remember, Danjo, early or 'original' Karazenpo did not have the vast curriculum it has expanded into today, neither did Kajukenbo. So, if you asking 'original' then it is included in Shaolin Kempo. The same forms in SK that my instructor and I needed back in the 70's to make black belt are still the requirements today along with almost all the numerical combinations (we needed 1-21, 26 & 28, now the 'standard' to black is 1-26). As far as the current USSD (Mattera's organization) goes, I had access to two of their training manuels form different years and there is very, very little difference in the curriculum up to black belt as what Cerio taught Villari and Villari carried on, not at all enough to call it a different system.

In closing, I think the problem is not the techniques and/or the forms but the actual training methods and promotions. Yes, many of the 'newer' instructors may be teaching only the 'surface arts' because of the quick rise through the ranks and not enough honing of the skills to fill instructor slots but please keep this in mind also. The much older instructors of karate styles in this country and I mean starting in 1946 into the 60's, including U.S. servicemen, ONLY had training in the 'surface arts' and also experienced a 'rather' quick rise in ranks when they began teaching and promoting black belts in this country. Look how many have become UNDISPUTED champions and legends through self development over the many decades! We seem to either forget this or want to forget this, I don't know which but it's certainly fact. Something to think about....................

Thanks Prof. I was mainly wondering with an eye to training in a style that was simliar to Shaolin Kempo. It certainly doesn't have to be exact, but at least not totally unfamiliar would be nice.

I have to agree with what you said regarding some of the old school practitioners. I knew a few who had been stationed in Okinawa or Korea for only a year and yet they got their black belts. Yet, for the most part, these guys seemed pretty tough. Back to the old adage of the individual making a system work I guess. Sometimes I wonder whether the Okinawans or Koreans didn't really care about ranking Americans and never expected anything to come of it so they just gave them their rank?

At any rate, I'm looking for a place to train come July and it looks like either Kajukenbo or Karazenpo will be the thing to do.

 

[Kempojujutsu]

Last week (2-7-2005) I ordered the 4 self defense tapes. Century/Panther is now offering the old vintage videos now on DVD or VHS for $9.99 if anyone wants to complete there kajukenbo series. I pick up the 4 SD tapes, to check out Kajukenbo. s Also to see how close it is to Kempo Jujutsu.

 

[KENPOJOE]

Danjo, the farther from the source one goes, the more dilution of the original art you have, which could be good, could be bad, but one thing is for certain, it's not the original art. Then again, you won't find any totally original art out there today period, in any system, due to the human factor of change which creates individual stylistic differences. Look at the older traditonal systems, on the Karate section of this forum someone had posted that at a tournament they saw Bassai performed four radically different ways. Here's what I can tell you from personal experience as far as KGS goes. Sonny Gascon, KGS's fouinder, taught George Pesare and George Pesare taught Nick Cerio who in turn taught Fred Villari and the rest is history. Villari left Cerio in '71 before the advent of Nick Cerio's Kenpo. The Shaolin Kempo Villari taught up to black belt level, actually around 2nd dan (Villari made up to 2nd under Cerio but parted ways before the completion of his one year probation, so he's listed as a shodan in one of Cerio's books) is a mildly modified version of Karazenpo, after that Villari's Kempo took a strong Kung Fu twist which started with the form Sho Tung Kwok

Hi Folks,
The legacy of the karazenpo lineage is a trail that I consider fortunate to have seen in it's myrid formats over years. Fred Villari's Shaolim Kempo is not Nick Cerio's Kenpo and NCK is not George Pesare's Kenpo and Pesare's Kenpo is not Victor "Sonny" Gascon's Karazenpo Goshinjutsu. The styles/systems are intertwined links of chain, but each has been added to or deleted from or changed by each consectutive individual, as well as their respective student who they were influenced by. A person is the total of their life experiences and influences in their lives.

Hansuki was adopted from the Chow/Chun connection of Goshinjitsu Kai Chinese Kempo. Swift Tigers was inspired by Pesare's #7 kata,

I've had the honor and privilage of seeing Bill Chun Jr. perform his father's form and can easily see Prof. Chow's influences and see how the present form taught is a conglomeration of several different sources [such as James Mitose's Kosho Ryu yoga breathing exercises and Prof Chow's techniques]. I don't believe that Swift Tigers came from Pesare's 7 Kata but rather from other sources [although I am researching it and have been for awhile] It seems to have more of Chow's or other chinese influences but they have yet to be identified.

other than that, it's all Villari's system at that point. Anyone who made black belt in Shaolin Kempo the 70's and even the early 80's and possibly a little beyond, has about as close as you're going to come outside of going back to George Pesare.,

I'd actually say closer to Nick Cerio's kenpo [circa 1970's]

I will venture to say the Villari schools probably still teach the same curriculum to black belt as they did in the 70's but I'd have to check. I first studied at Gm. Pesare's school in 1978, all original forms and Pesare's original 21 combinations were included in the Villari curriculum with very little modification and I'll even go back to circa. 1960, for I have sen old black & white films of this early Karazenpo first from Prof. Cerio in 1992 and later (2003), a different film from Gm. Pesare. Remember, Danjo, early or 'original' Karazenpo did not have the vast curriculum it has expanded into today, neither did Kajukenbo. So, if you asking 'original' then it is included in Shaolin Kempo. The same forms in SK that my instructor and I needed back in the 70's to make black belt are still the requirements today along with almost all the numerical combinations (we needed 1-21, 26 & 28, now the 'standard' to black is 1-26). As far as the current USSD (Mattera's organization) goes, I had access to two of their training manuels form different years and there is very, very little difference in the curriculum up to black belt as what Cerio taught Villari and Villari carried on, not at all enough to call it a different system.

Having seen the "evolution" of these various styles was my impetus to start to research them by asking the people who were actually there when these things happened and get the stories directly from them. I have encouraged these people to write about their experiences and tell the world the "truth" about many of the incidents that comprised these styles in their present state. I can only hope that they heed my advice and commit to that endevor. The truly sad thing is that many of their own parent organizations do not use those individual's insights to add to the "well of knowledge" and so it becomes lost to all.

In closing, I think the problem is not the techniques and/or the forms but the actual training methods and promotions. Yes, many of the 'newer' instructors may b

e teaching only the 'surface arts' because of the quick rise through the ranks and not enough honing of the skills to fill instructor slots but please keep this in mind also. The much older instructors of karate styles in this country and I mean starting in 1946 into the 60's, including U.S. servicemen, ONLY had training in the 'surface arts' and also experienced a 'rather' quick rise in ranks when they began teaching and promoting black belts in this country. Look how many have become UNDISPUTED champions and legends through self development over the many decades! We seem to either forget this or want to forget this, I don't know which but it's certainly fact. Something to think about....................

This is my 200th post to martialtalk and it's been an interesting journey so far...I started posting on the AOL Kenpo message board when some of the top people in the kenpo/kempo groups would post to it and the information was incredible. I'm glad to see Martialtalk continue that tradition.
I hope that I was of some service,
KENPOJOE

 

[Danjo]

Thanks for your reply. My big interest in the differences etc. has to do with where I will go to study starting in July. I have a brown belt in Shaolin Kempo, but do not wish to continue in it in the local dojos due to numerous factors that include price and quality of instruction. I began by looking into local Karazenpo schools on the internet and asked John Bishop for his opinions etc. Then, I realized that his school was only 20 minutes away from me. Given that Kajukenbo and Karazenpo were where Shaolin Kempo came from, I thought it would be a good fit to train in them with my existing background. The extensive questions reagarding the differences etc. were due to my having never seen Kajukenbo or Karazenpo in action. Now, I have one of Prof. Halbuna's tapes (purple belt) and have seen a few clips of Kajukenbo on the net. Again, I asked John Bishop for his opinion as to how typical these were etc. and he was very helpful. I have not been able to see any Karazenpo video, but the Kajukenbo seems fairly close to what I have been studying in terms of movement. The combinations are a good deal different, though even there there are a couple that are pretty much the same so it looks as if it would be a pretty good fit for me. I just want to study at a good school that teaches this type of martial art. Whether the name is Shaolin Kempo, Karazenpo, or Kajukenbo doesn't matter as much to me as the quality, price and convenience. It's all part of the same Ohana. (a cool term that Sigung Bishop and Prof. Shuras have introduced me to recently).

 

[Seabrook]

GAB,

Did you get the pdf file of my book? I got this message in my email system this morning (I sent the book to you yesterday):


This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification.

THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY.

YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE.

Delivery to the following recipients has been delayed.

*******

Send me an email and let me know. THANKS!

Jamie Seabrook
www.seabrook.gotkenpo.com

 

[GAB]

Hi Jamie,

Yes I got It!

Thanks for the extra effort.

Regards, Gary

 

[John DeMartini]

Hi

This is my first post to this site and I thought I might be able to contribute something of relevance, although about a year or so late.

In Bruce Haines' "Karate and it's Development in Hawaii to 1959," there is no mention of a John Leoning as a black belt of William Chow. It only mentions Paul Yamaguchi, Masaichi Oshiro, Ed Parker, and Adriano Emperado. Apparently, Haines did not interview Sijo Emperado and there is no mention of his black belts at that time.

I do seem to remember a book by James Lee called "Modern Kung-Fu Karate" that had a small bio on Prof. Chow and I seem to remember a John Leone being listed as one of Prof. Chow's black belts teaching on the mainland. However, since I no longer have access to this book I cannot check this out.

I must say that I have enjoyed Mr. Bishop's articles in the various martial arts publications over the years and his research seems pretty thorough to me. Thanks for all that you are doing for the martial arts. We need more people like you Mr. Bishop.

 

[KGS BBS]

I just stumbled upon this former topic which I had contributed to under another screen name: 'Karazenpo' a while ago. Now that some time has passed and much more has been discovered, it's been found that the form Swift Tigers was indeed inspired by SGM. Pesare's #7 form and Prof. Nick Cerio's version of #7 is Circle of the Panther as I had previously proposed. In the very early 90's Prof. Cerio told us Panther was from #6 but it had been a while since he studied under SGM Pesare at the time (almost 25 years) and it appears he actually mean't #7 as # 6 is nothing like it. Yes, Swift Tigers deviates from the original as GM. Villari had radically altered it adding a strong Kung Fu flavor, plus the fact is he must have learned the form while studying under Cerio who also radically altered it. Sensei Matt Barnes did a nice breakdown/comparison of Swift Tigers & Circle of the Panther-Matt has also seen the original #7. Again, the connection is most definitely there.

The core of this Kempo only goes back to Nick Cerio THROUGH George Pesare as I had stated. This is why I say Pesare's is the closest you're going to get to the original stuff for for Cerio also alterred it somewhat when he passed it on to Villari and then changed it radically by 1974. SGM. Pesare has kept the original forms the same. He added and deleted some combinations over the years but he has planned to incorporate the original techniques back into his system. I can prove this very easily. SGM. Pesare's DVD is out and covers the 1960's, early on to the late 60's. It shows Prof. Cerio as a white belt evolving through the ranks and also features Mr. Pesare's first black belt, GM. Roger Carpenter. It also covers the combonations, forms and drills. This film will look very, very familiar to any Shaolin Kempo practitioner who traces their roots to Villari. The skill levels of these early pioneers is something to behold. Don't take my word for it, it can be obtained by e-mailing SGM. Pesare at gpeseare7@hotmail.com. As they say, 'a picture is worth a thousand words'.

Please bear in mind, GGM. Victor 'Sonny' Gascon, the founder of KGS who was very highly respected amongst his peers and seniors as a true kempo fighter, went back to Hawaii in 1969. Professor Walter L. N. Godin, a name in his own right, went on to found Godin's Chinese Kenpo BUT contrary to what many believe, Prof. Godin, although a contributor to the system, did not spend that much time w/ GGM. Gascon during that early period of the inception of KGS before he moved on. The other KGS black belts either retired, passed on before their time or went on to found their own systems. Mr. Pesare kept the rudiments of Mr. Gascon and his school's teachings on the west coast as the basis of what he brought to New England. Of course he continued his studies under various instructors adding, deleting, refining and evolving his perspective of what he was originally taught making quite a name for himself here on the east coast w/ his stable of PKA World Champion kickboxers and top tournament competitors. The 'Pesare' name became legendary here in New England.

Some today credit the Shaolin Kempo forms, namely what is used in the kata series as having been created by Shaolin monks in China when in reality it was Sonny Gascon and his early staff and later George Pesare who created the forms. Mr. Pesare created #5, yes, #5...#6 and #7. You will also most definitely see a relationship with Parker's Kenpo as stated in a previous post and KGS along with other Hawaiian-derived kenpo/kempo systems because in my opinion, they are all branches of the same tree if they go back to Mitose/Chow. Don't forget Parker and Gascon trained with each other and were close friends. Parker had Gascon as a guest instructor at his school and Gascon was a guest referree at Parker's legendary Long Beach Internationals. Cerio trained with Parker back in the mid to late 60's, he took Fred Villari and Prof. Larry Garron with him. Both Cerio and Garron had verfied this although it has been said Parker denied ever meeting Villari. The core or the rudiments of the the mother art remains pretty much intact. Their major differences is where the emphasis lies. Some are more into Jiu Jitsu, some Kung Fu, some Karate and some an eclectic blending of all three with some other additions including the 'American way' of doing things. Respectfully submitted, Prof. Joe Shuras

 

[Gentle Fist]

Once again well said Professor! Is there an online link to the Panther and Swift Tigers comparison? Circle of the Panther is in the Master's Text and looks like a pretty sweet form as a whole.

 

[Matt]

Once again well said Professor! Is there an online link to the Panther and Swift Tigers comparison? Circle of the Panther is in the Master's Text and looks like a pretty sweet form as a whole.

The breakdown occurs in this thread, and special thanks to KGS BBS for following up on my initial hunch.

Matt

 

[marlon]

I had asked this question another way before so let me rephrase it: How would you recommend that someone teach in order to produce quality black belts the way N.Cerio and G.Pesare and others were reputed to produce?

Respectfull,
Marlon

 

[Gentle Fist]

The breakdown occurs in this thread, and special thanks to KGS BBS for following up on my initial hunch.

Matt

Thanks once again sir...:asian:

 

[GPKKI #37]

I had asked this question another way before so let me rephrase it: How would you recommend that someone teach in order to produce quality black belts the way N.Cerio and G.Pesare and others were reputed to produce?

Respectfull,
Marlon

Marlon:

Are you asking "What is the best order to teach your curriculum to create quality black belts"? If so, what does that matter? George Pesare teaches a very complex combination at the "no belt" level in order to earn white belt (2 months or so). He always has, even with Nick Cerio (saw it on reel to reel dated 1962). I do think that the curriculum is important, but more so, isn't it more important that your student has the ability to use your technique effectively at the most granular level? I think that's a better guage of a good martial artist, not just someone who can 'parrot' back a system, but can truly understand and implement it's application.

my 2 cents, which still can't buy you a cup of coffee.

Marc

 

[Matt]

I had asked this question another way before so let me rephrase it: How would you recommend that someone teach in order to produce quality black belts the way N.Cerio and G.Pesare and others were reputed to produce?

Respectfull,
Marlon

Marlon-
The question you are asking(at least the way you are phrasing it now), in my opinion, actually has very little to do with this thread.

Content vs. Pedagogy.

You've answered your own question. It's not 'what should I teach', but rather 'how should I teach.' The true secret (listen up everybody - this will make you amazingly powerful)to the success of William Chow, Adriano Emperado and George Pesare was: intensity. They pushed harder and worked harder than pretty much anyone else. It's (to a large degree) not what you do, it's how you do it. Yes, there were differences, but if you could somehow put the curricula of those three men in a box, and had them draw material out of a hat so that they ended up with each others' techniques, they would still have put out legendary black belts. If I had to imagine one advantage they all shared over the current crop of kempo, it is that they had less. They weren't worried about remembering their 108th technique. They were finding the energy to do their basic technique a 108th time that class. Ironically, many of the more respected black belts of Fred Villari are from the early days, like 1973-75. Guess what they had for a curriculum - 1-30 combinations, and forms that topped out at Honsuki. Less.

 

[John Bishop]

Marlon-
The question you are asking(at least the way you are phrasing it now), in my opinion, actually has very little to do with this thread.

Content vs. Pedagogy.

You've answered your own question. It's not 'what should I teach', but rather 'how should I teach.' The true secret (listen up everybody - this will make you amazingly powerful)to the success of William Chow, Adriano Emperado and George Pesare was: intensity. They pushed harder and worked harder than pretty much anyone else. It's (to a large degree) not what you do, it's how you do it. Yes, there were differences, but if you could somehow put the curricula of those three men in a box, and had them draw material out of a hat so that they ended up with each others' techniques, they would still have put out legendary black belts. If I had to imagine one advantage they all shared over the current crop of kempo, it is that they had less. They weren't worried about remembering their 108th technique.

Sijo Emperado shouldn't be lumped in with these other kenpo/kempo masters. His whole reason for getting together with the other four founders of Kajukenbo was to have more, not stay with the status quo of less is better. They created this whole thing everyone is now calling mixed martial arts.
If your running chain schools or video programs where someone can earn a black belt in 12-18 months, then 30 combinations is probably a good number.
But if your black belts are training 5-6 years for their student black, then 105 combinations is not a large amount of material.
Sijo Emperado never settled for less. He always looked for the right tool for the right job. His Original Method of Kajukenbo has 105 defensive combinations divided into punch, grab, knife, club, and multiple attacker defenses. It also has 14 katas.
And then there's 3 more branches of the Original Method.

 

[marlon]

Perhaps you are correct Matt, however, what is the purpose of finding the original content, if not to understand how to become better and how to produce better students?

Marlon-
The question you are asking(at least the way you are phrasing it now), in my opinion, actually has very little to do with this thread.

Content vs. Pedagogy.

You've answered your own question. It's not 'what should I teach', but rather 'how should I teach.' The true secret (listen up everybody - this will make you amazingly powerful)to the success of William Chow, Adriano Emperado and George Pesare was: intensity. They pushed harder and worked harder than pretty much anyone else. It's (to a large degree) not what you do, it's how you do it. Yes, there were differences, but if you could somehow put the curricula of those three men in a box, and had them draw material out of a hat so that they ended up with each others' techniques, they would still have put out legendary black belts.

Intensity is a great answer Matt. Do you look for students with intensity or who want that, or have you found a way to consistently motivate your students to a high level of intensity?


If I had to imagine one advantage they all shared over the current crop of kempo, it is that they had less. They weren't worried about remembering their 108th technique. They were finding the energy to do their basic technique a 108th time that class. Ironically, many of the more respected black belts of Fred Villari are from the early days, like 1973-75. Guess what they had for a curriculum - 1-30 combinations, and forms that topped out at Honsuki. Less.

Perhaps the more techniques helps to motivate students to higher intensity levels and is not merely a marketing ploy. I agree with Master Bishop's post that a curricullum for black belt involving at least 5-6 years of work and training, with many yechniques and forms shold not inhibit intensity, but rather versatility and broader understanding so as to help them make the material work for them in ways that were not presented in class or a seminar or a book.
And lastly my question had to do with the curricullum, despite my feeling that it was training that mattered more than style /curricullum...perhaps i wam mistaken. It is not semantics to my understanding at this stage, rather seeking the training that is truth in terms of product...i.e . an effective martial artist...by corollory an effective teacher.

Respectfully,
Marlon

 

[Danjo]

In terms of how many techniques there are Prof. Chow apparently had a HUGE amount of them. According to his students, he never taught the same thing twice. I don't know if that simply meant that he had a never ending supply of learned techniques, or that he made them up s he went, or that he saw something he liked and brought that in to his curriculum (if one can even call what he did a curriculum). In other words, I don't think that the "Less is More" idea applied to Prof. Chow either. It sounds more like a recent construct to pare something down to a size that can be taught quickly.