Tracy Kenpo vs. EPAK

[distalero]

"One of the things that's missing in PUBLIC EPAK is the establishment of solid basics, prior to shortening circles & rounding edges. Lotsa guys see the smaller circles of the oldsters, and mimic it without recognition of the process engaged in to reach that point. First we learn to print, then handwrite, then shorthand. The lack of power I see in the EPAK folk that can't hit worth a dang comes from jumping straight to shorthand, because their upline seniors are doing it, ..."so I should do it to". Newbies on this route never develop the muscle memory necesary for effective motion. You gotta have a move, before you can economize it.

Walking your own kenpo journey still starts at a beginning. The newer conceptual/motion kenpo works best for those who start slow, and pay attention to quality and detail. Print first. The guys who jump to shorthand to look quick & snappy, but can't break through wet toilet paper with their hits, are the ones who bring the quality of the ART into question. So, what is the difference between ART, and PRACTICE?"



If I may, and to add my voice to yours, the reasoning in the "old" days ( prior to AK) and in my neck of the woods, was that whatever frament or portion of a technique was actually used would "round off" and shorten up of it's own accord in the fear and adrenaline rush of a fight. It was never judged necessary (flashy and fun/suitable for demos, yes, but certainly not necessary) to practice shortening things up as some sort of advanced level . Doing full motion, fast, was the impressive thing (harder than it sounds; for me anyhow); shortening movement in practice was considered at best just a bad habit. At worst, dangerous, for the reasons you referred to.

 

[KenpoDave]

My experience is somewhat different than those expressed above. There seems to be some confussion between style and method. Every kenpoist stylises their kenpo in their own way. Large Strong people tend to shorten movements and rely on their strength, smaller people must develop technique in order to overcome the stregth disadvantage. I have seen Tracy's practitioners who round off their blocks and strikes and EPAK guys which use a more circular movement than others. Taught properly the the two systems are more alike than not, the differances are primarily centered around the method in which the system is taught rather than the application of self defense. Some would say that EPAK encourages it's practitioners to experiment more and ask "what if"; Tracy's does also but it is somewhat suppressed until Brown Belt levels, the thought being you should not experiment until you have a strong foundation to draw from.
The more important factor is the instructor, can the instructor teach you to make all of the self defense techniques work. Note: I did not say can your instructor make all the techniques work. But can he/she teach you, to do so. Is it explained clearly can they answer the tough questions. In my experience big guys who teach little guys are rarely able to do so.

Just my personal observation....

I agree here. Most of the criticisms I see of either style sound to me like the critic did not have the right instructor.

BTW, Roger Greene is a big guy, and I saw him double the power of a 95 pound woman's punch in one 3 hour seminar. The bigger guys were rocking...

 

[KenpoDave]

If I may, and to add my voice to yours, the reasoning in the "old" days ( prior to AK) and in my neck of the woods, was that whatever frament or portion of a technique was actually used would "round off" and shorten up of it's own accord in the fear and adrenaline rush of a fight. It was never judged necessary (flashy and fun/suitable for demos, yes, but certainly not necessary) to practice shortening things up as some sort of advanced level . Doing full motion, fast, was the impressive thing (harder than it sounds; for me anyhow); shortening movement in practice was considered at best just a bad habit. At worst, dangerous, for the reasons you referred to.

Excellent. There is that which is pragmatic and that which is developmental and there is some overlap. But it is an important distinction.

 

[Karazenpo]

Quote from distalero: If I may, and to add my voice to yours, the reasoning in the "old" days ( prior to AK) and in my neck of the woods, was that whatever frament or portion of a technique was actually used would "round off" and shorten up of it's own accord in the fear and adrenaline rush of a fight. It was never judged necessary (flashy and fun/suitable for demos, yes, but certainly not necessary) to practice shortening things up as some sort of advanced level . Doing full motion, fast, was the impressive thing (harder than it sounds; for me anyhow); shortening movement in practice was considered at best just a bad habit. At worst, dangerous, for the reasons you referred to.

I say: I agree with the fact that only fragments or portions of techniques are used in reality fighting-that's a given due to the dynamics of fighting but in moments of stress we will react to previous learned behavior, that has been proven and is the premise in the defensive tactics training of police officers and ofcourse special ops. We are what we eat and how we train is how we will react. If shorter movements are what is used in most combative situations then we should train in shorter movements. By the same token, there will be times when longer movements are applicable, therefore, a well balanced training regimen should consist of both concepts.

 

[GAB]

Older Version of Kenpo???? Are you tryiing to tell me that Kenpo changed
through the years? I guess all these guys doing the recent version didnt
understand the older version and had to change it.........;-)

Hi,

Was'nt one of the things EP was disapointed in his Black belts was there lack of ability, not to see that changing some things was not "bad" but good.

Each Black belt was to go out and do the kenpo in a way that suited his or hers body style, strength and weakness's.

Not just to mimic and stagnate, not to not think, and not stay in the confines of what he taught them.

JKD (Bruce Lee) or FMA (Guro Dan) both of them were very much influnced by EP. I also believe Guro Dan influeinced Bruce also. They were a complement to EP and each other.

So in essence when you see the 2 mentioned arts it is with pleasure that EP would watch and say, "I taught them that and they incorporated it into what they are doing, I am proud". Not the other way around.

Just like a musician who has a song and he does it, it becomes a hit. Someone else sings it, and adds a little of there own style, it is a complement.

To stagnate was not what he wanted...Water flows around a rock and continues to the next bend, it is versatile, used for many things and different applications.

I believe that is the thing that he was unable to understand, don't be a xerox machine be an artist.

So EPAK is change and Tracy is no change.

Regards, Gary

 

[KenpoDave]

So EPAK is change and Tracy is no change.

Regards, Gary

Being that you study NEITHER, I would like to point out that your statement is crap. It is an extremely broad generalization. There have been changes in the Tracy Curriculum since I began. I don't know if the curriculum of EPAKK has changed, but I do know that many instructors teach what they call a newer flavor.

Does kenpo need to change? Again, perhaps the method of training or methods of teaching are updated constantly, but the kenpo remains. If not, well, it's not kenpo.

 

[Michael Billings]

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Thanks,
Michael Billings
MT S-Moderator

 

[donald]

Having worked in both systems. I have to agree with White Tiger's post. I have seen, and had the honor of working with some excellent instructors from both systems. It(in my opinion)truly depends on the approach of the instructor. I think that generally the studios that teach the Tracy system are more straight forward in thier application. Where as a EPAK studio tends to present thier version with more principles in mind. Either way can be beneficial, or detremental. It just truly depends on the presentation, and skill of the instructors involved.

By His Grace
1st John1:9

 

[koga ha]

Hi,

Was'nt one of the things EP was disapointed in his Black belts was there lack of ability, not to see that changing some things was not "bad" but good.

Each Black belt was to go out and do the kenpo in a way that suited his or hers body style, strength and weakness's.

Not just to mimic and stagnate, not to not think, and not stay in the confines of what he taught them.

JKD (Bruce Lee) or FMA (Guro Dan) both of them were very much influnced by EP. I also believe Guro Dan influeinced Bruce also. They were a complement to EP and each other.

So in essence when you see the 2 mentioned arts it is with pleasure that EP would watch and say, "I taught them that and they incorporated it into what they are doing, I am proud". Not the other way around.

Just like a musician who has a song and he does it, it becomes a hit. Someone else sings it, and adds a little of there own style, it is a complement.

To stagnate was not what he wanted...Water flows around a rock and continues to the next bend, it is versatile, used for many things and different applications.

I believe that is the thing that he was unable to understand, don't be a xerox machine be an artist.

So EPAK is change and Tracy is no change.

Regards, Gary

when changing or adding new flavor, whatever you want to call it...one thing you may want to keep in mind or think about...when you take a system that is hundreds or thousands of years old and change it, the art will eventually become diluted and disjointed.

people long before you and me have given their time, blood, or life using and developing techniques within a given system. and to have someone come along and put their personal spin on techniques...interesting how that would be looked at as a good thing.

however, i would have to retract my statement if i ever come across a human with four arms and three legs...yeah, there is probably a need to tweak the system.

ah, too long of an opinion...sorry

disclaimer: i'm only speaking on my behalf and don't necessarily reflect the views of individuals on this board :uhyeah:

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

Ayup. Lets hope tomorrow is also a good day. I worry that the presence of so much degree-by-mail stuff in kenpo is progressively peeing away the integrity of the art, in all its various manifestations. Very few Seniors more interested in quality, than a buck. We should seek, as a consumer public, to reniforce the actions of those representing quality by participating in their presentations of knowledge.

D.

Yes, tomorrow will be better than today. Today is better than yesterday. Today is not Kenpo's day. Nor will it be tomorrow. %think%

 

[The Kai]

First off if you believe the systems of martial arts that are popular today are thousands of years old, you got another thing coming.


Second there is not 1 art that you see today that has not been altered in some way. From how kicks are done to stances to conditioning methods, the use of pads in striking drills. Sparring equipment. how has that changed thing?

Thirdly an art has to be adjusted say every 10,000 years or so. Even the wheel has been updated!

Todd

 

[koga ha]

First off if you believe the systems of martial arts that are popular today are thousands of years old, you got another thing coming.


Second there is not 1 art that you see today that has not been altered in some way. From how kicks are done to stances to conditioning methods, the use of pads in striking drills. Sparring equipment. how has that changed thing?

Thirdly an art has to be adjusted say every 10,000 years or so. Even the wheel has been updated!

Todd

actually, i agree with you on the first statement, however; the second statement is to inclusive. maybe that is your experience, so i'll leave that alone.

out of curiosity, what adjustments have to be made every 10k years?

 

[Old Fat Kenpoka]

out of curiosity, what adjustments have to be made every 10k years?

Obviously, every 10,000 years you have to adjust for an ice age. :viking1:

 

[The Kai]

The attacker, look ow boxing has changed in the last 100 years- Being brought in a culture of boxing and televised wrestling (real or not) gives people a few tools that they did'nt have.
As a Martial Artist understand that your capicity to learn, grow and realize what the arts are capable of (Pressure points, or SL4) has been dramitically altered in the last 30 years
Todd

 

[koga ha]

The attacker, look ow boxing has changed in the last 100 years- Being brought in a culture of boxing and televised wrestling (real or not) gives people a few tools that they did'nt have.
As a Martial Artist understand that your capicity to learn, grow and realize what the arts are capable of (Pressure points, or SL4) has been dramitically altered in the last 30 years
Todd

however, a straight line is still a straight line, a 90 degree angle is still a 90 degree angle, and so on and so forth. in other words, strikes/punches can only come from certain angles.

would you call it altered or increasing your knowledge?

 

[pete]

Obviously, every 10,000 years you have to adjust for an ice age. :viking1:

i must begin training in a parka and golashes... i believe that would qualify as "environmental kenpo"

pete

 

[The Kai]

however, a straight line is still a straight line, a 90 degree angle is still a 90 degree angle, and so on and so forth. in other words, strikes/punches can only come from certain angles.

would you call it altered or increasing your knowledge?

I think the issue is that in the simplest terms, yes a straight line is still a straight line. Also true 0 and 1 are only 0 and 1 yet lookis what we can do with them! The timing of the attack, the point of origin, americans increasing famaliarity with the Martial Arts(albiet thru TV and Movies),
There is a difference in a feudal art form that relies on hand to hand only when in the rare cases you are without weapons. Now days not to many of are armed or armored.
While a straight punch is a straight punch, there is a difference between the straight punch thrown by a Shtokan stylist and a boxer! But, yet they are technically the same motion. allthought the timing, retraction and "intent" differ.

Look at the art of streching and conditioning, has this not changed in the last 30 years? remeber at one time it was encouraged for Karate stylist to pound thier fists till the first and second knuckles were even (probaly a throw back to when you needed to punch thru armor). Look thru some of the 1st books published in the states, or read the Bubashi (spelling). Compare to where we are now.

While I'm not the most experience of all people I have managed to be around a little
Thanks
Todd

 

[RavenDarkfellow]

Hello everyone, I'm new here, and this is my first official post.



I don't mean to insult anyone, nor am I deliberately trying to be argumentative, but I'm in Tracey Kenpo and most of what you guys are saying about the smaller circles, marriage of gravity, etc. is true in my system as well. We tend to be part progressive, part traditional.

Our basics maintain our traditional origins, while our techniques are progressive and changing. Even at white-belt level, my instructor showed me the rising (upward) block, and I had already learned one version of it from a friend of mine in ITF TKD. This version started with the fist moving in a straight upward in a verticle motion, guiding your arm like a missle, then the rest of your arm snaps outward horizontally to provide the full coverage. He agreed that this was better than having the arm horizontal to begin with, and bringing it up horizontal the whole way.

I really think that the only serious difference between EPAK and TK is the names of the techniques, and to some degree, the order in which they're learnt.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Hello everyone, I'm new here, and this is my first official post.



I don't mean to insult anyone, nor am I deliberately trying to be argumentative, but I'm in Tracey Kenpo and most of what you guys are saying about the smaller circles, marriage of gravity, etc. is true in my system as well. We tend to be part progressive, part traditional.

Our basics maintain our traditional origins, while our techniques are progressive and changing. Even at white-belt level, my instructor showed me the rising (upward) block, and I had already learned one version of it from a friend of mine in ITF TKD. This version started with the fist moving in a straight upward in a verticle motion, guiding your arm like a missle, then the rest of your arm snaps outward horizontally to provide the full coverage. He agreed that this was better than having the arm horizontal to begin with, and bringing it up horizontal the whole way.

I really think that the only serious difference between EPAK and TK is the names of the techniques, and to some degree, the order in which they're learnt.

Spoken like someone who spends more time rolling "natural 20's" than rolling on the mat.

 

[Karazenpo]

I'd like to jump in on the debate with Todd and Koga ha. Imho, Todd is correct in the sense that there is no way 'man' could ever practice a martial art all these centuries and not change it, it's the nature of the beast and it applies to the technological advances of mankind also. I mean we're not exactly commuting to work in donkey carts and we are certainly not communicating right now by carrier pigeon (unless of course you live in the middle east, lol). It's the natural progression of life in general, mankind is constantly evolving, never stagnant and this carries over into it's martial arts.

Originally Posted by koga ha
however, a straight line is still a straight line, a 90 degree angle is still a 90 degree angle, and so on and so forth. in other words, strikes/punches can only come from certain angles.

would you call it altered or increasing your knowledge?

I also understand koga ha's response in the above quote. It's not so much kenpo is evolving, it was always there, 'everything', it's our 'understanding' of kenpo that is actively changing or evolving. As stated in a previous post, human beings naturally have two arms and two legs and martial arts are based on that premise as applied to natural laws. Physics, kiniesiology, body mechcanics, the body in motion and because this is technically a science, we're not 'inventing' anything but discovering applications that have been there since the beginning of the creation of this world. It's the 'way things run'. So, yes, the 'rudiments' or 'natural laws' of all techniques never change but it's our understanding on how to apply them efficiently to changing situations that changes.