What if ...

[Sigung86]

I posted the following on Kenpo Talk, but then thought I might get more responses here, so here goes:

I was kind of noodling around here on the forum when a question or two struck me that I would like to put out here.

First off, in my little model of the world, I imagine that some, if not all, of you have a copy of or have seen the cd/dvd version of the original four films that Chuck Sullivan and SGM Parker put out in 1959/60 in Black Belt Magazine?

It was, without the inclusion of short 1, and short 2, supposedly the sum total of the "organized" system of Kenpo as it was "back in the day". It included 32 techniques, without names, only numbers. It had short 3, the two man Black Belt set, and staff set on it.

I guess what I am getting to asking those who have seen the film ...

Is it a viable self defense system as it stands?

How would you teach it in such a way to make it a commercial entity?

I think that it would be good here to say, let your imagination run wild.

I am simply curious about it. I'd kind of like to work toward inferences by other folks who are on this end of the Kenpo tunnel, to see how things might have developed otherwise... Consider it more an exercise in "what if" than anything else.

Thanks for your inputs.

Dan

 

[Flying Crane]

First off, in my little model of the world, I imagine that some, if not all, of you have a copy of or have seen the cd/dvd version of the original four films that Chuck Sullivan and SGM Parker put out in 1959/60 in Black Belt Magazine?

It was, without the inclusion of short 1, and short 2, supposedly the sum total of the "organized" system of Kenpo as it was "back in the day". It included 32 techniques, without names, only numbers. It had short 3, the two man Black Belt set, and staff set on it.

Are you saying 32 techs TOTAL, or per belt?

 

[Sigung86]

Are you saying 32 techs TOTAL, or per belt?

Hi Michael,

No ... There were, on the film, 32 techniques in total. However, back in those days, I also have it on a relatively expert authority, that short 1 and short 2 were taught in a "continuous" form, and not as separate entities. Also, something else to consider ... The book that SGM Parker published entitled, "Kenpo", had 35 techniques as opposed to 32. So one has to wonder just where and when .... :idunno:

 

[Flying Crane]

Wow, this is very interesting.

I'm gonna send you a PM about this...

thx., I had no idea about this.

 

[Kenpojujitsu3]

I posted the following on Kenpo Talk, but then thought I might get more responses here, so here goes:

I was kind of noodling around here on the forum when a question or two struck me that I would like to put out here.

First off, in my little model of the world, I imagine that some, if not all, of you have a copy of or have seen the cd/dvd version of the original four films that Chuck Sullivan and SGM Parker put out in 1959/60 in Black Belt Magazine?

It was, without the inclusion of short 1, and short 2, supposedly the sum total of the "organized" system of Kenpo as it was "back in the day". It included 32 techniques, without names, only numbers. It had short 3, the two man Black Belt set, and staff set on it.

I guess what I am getting to asking those who have seen the film ...

Is it a viable self defense system as it stands?

How would you teach it in such a way to make it a commercial entity?

I think that it would be good here to say, let your imagination run wild.

I am simply curious about it. I'd kind of like to work toward inferences by other folks who are on this end of the Kenpo tunnel, to see how things might have developed otherwise... Consider it more an exercise in "what if" than anything else.

Thanks for your inputs.

Dan

Viable yes, the best option? not by a long shot.

Too make it commercial, add more requirements to pad the levels and...........wait a minute.......that already happened.

 

[Sigung86]

Viable yes, the best option? not by a long shot.

Too make it commercial, add more requirements to pad the levels and...........wait a minute.......that already happened.

And so ... Not by a long shot is pretty much of a non-answer, sir. Just kind of curious as to why, in your opinion, it wouldn't work, and what you might see as the long shot.

Kind of seeing if there is much original thought out there on what might be different, and what could work within the above format as a more useful system.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

And so ... Not by a long shot is pretty much of a non-answer, sir. Just kind of curious as to why, in your opinion, it wouldn't work, and what you might see as the long shot.

Kind of seeing if there is much original thought out there on what might be different, and what could work within the above format as a more useful system.

When you consider that the long and short forms of kenpo, alone, have more content than most Japanese karate systems/kata in their entirety, it does not seem unreasonable to me that a "less is more" approach could work in kenpo. The only differences between many of the traditional forms are the additions of things like, "Now, instead of just turning to the right and executing a shuto block and punch, we're gonna go to the right...AND left, AND add a snap kick" (wooohoo!). Whole new kata, canonized, and treated as treasure. What the trad Japanese systems DO have going for them over the vast majority of kenpo is a bigger magnifying glass on the quality of basics. You might only do the same 10 forms for 50 years, but you had by-god better be noticeably improved over how you did them 20 years ago. The sheer volume of kenpo alone allows for a contuum of slop to pass muster...something you would never see (well, almost never) in the trad nippon schools.

I'd say you could make someone dangerous with about 40-55 SD techs, the forms, and lots of randori and drills. Could give them a black belt, turn them loose on the public, and none would know the better. You would just have to be thoughtful about the handful you picked, and make sure you explored the applications in theory and hands-on very thoroughly.

Short 1, first move, could be applied defensively/counter-attacking(ly?) to a butt-load of attacks, from punches, pushes, grabs, tackle attempts, etc. IF one has a mind to look for the applications, and the discipline to drill for the possibilities with vigorous attunement...it would be perfectly possible to make the forms alone into an entire systematic approach. But, again, it would boil down to the thoroughness of the instructor in developing the approach and unfolding the material for his/her students. If that were viable for the most part now, there wouldn't even be a need for such discussions as this. We would all be learning, training, and using "what works".

Regards,

Dave

 

[Makalakumu]

When you consider that the long and short forms of kenpo, alone, have more content than most Japanese karate systems/kata in their entirety...

I don't know much about Kenpo, but this statement is really surprising to me. If one actually know just how much stuff is in the 5 pinan katas, it would certainly be hard to make such a statement. Anyway, is any online video of those two forms anywhere? My curiosity has been aroused...

 

[Flying Crane]

I don't know much about Kenpo, but this statement is really surprising to me. If one actually know just how much stuff is in the 5 pinan katas, it would certainly be hard to make such a statement. Anyway, is any online video of those two forms anywhere? My curiosity has been aroused...

These are more than just two forms. There are Short Forms 1-3 (some groups have a 4th one), and long forms 1 thru 8.

I don't know the pinans, so I can't comment on the accuracy of the statement. The kenpo forms do have a lot of material. However, because of the way they are often taught, I suspect many people only understand one application for each defensive combination contained in the forms. I wonder if the way the Pinans and other Japanese, Okinawan, and Korean forms are taught might leave the door somewhat more open for creativity and developing more interpretations for the movements, even if there are fewer of them. Since I don't know these others, I really can't say for sure, just speculating. Of course my own understanding of kenpo has its limits, so i am certainly not the fountain of gospel.

 

[Flying Crane]

Less is More, or More is More?

This is a question that I have been wrestling with for a while.

On the one hand, perhaps Wing Chun is a good example of the "Less is More" approach. There are only three hand forms, one wooden dummy form, and two traditional weapons forms, as well as various useage drills in most Wing Chun lineages. The forms are very simple, especially if you compare them to kenpo forms. But the wing chun people develop a good understanding of the principles behind the movements, and learn to be very very creative when applying the material. I know some Wing Chun people who are ferocious, and definitely are not lacking in effective fighting ability.

Tracy Kenpo might be a good example of "More is More". Endless technique lists as well as a bunch of forms. Lots of good stuff in there, but in my opinion there is also a lot of stuff that should be done away with. But again, the art can boast of some very very talented and fierce fighters.

maybe EPAK is somewhere in the middle. Still has a long technique list, but far shorter than half that of Tracys. Maybe the fluff has been eliminated and only the meat remains. I don't know since I haven't studied it.

Different approaches to an art. Some people respond better to some than they do to others. I guess it depends on the person and what they like and want from their training. But I think they can all be tremendously effective if done properly. Likewise, they can all fall flat on their faces if done poorly.

 

[Flying Crane]

I don't know much about Kenpo, but this statement is really surprising to me. If one actually know just how much stuff is in the 5 pinan katas, it would certainly be hard to make such a statement. Anyway, is any online video of those two forms anywhere? My curiosity has been aroused...

John,

Here is a link to someone doing Form #6. I never learned the form so I cannot comment on how well it is being done, but it gives you a sense of what kenpo forms are like.

The lower forms are more simple than this, but this is a pretty decent example of what you can expect in a kenpo form.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek6g-7qcaYE&mode=related&search=

 

[Makalakumu]

John,

Here is a link to someone doing Form #6. I never learned the form so I cannot comment on how well it is being done, but it gives you a sense of what kenpo forms are like.

The lower forms are more simple than this, but this is a pretty decent example of what you can expect in a kenpo form.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek6g-7qcaYE&mode=related&search=

Very interesting. Kenpo forms look like all of the "one-steps" strung together. I suppose that each sequence is what you guys are calling a "technique" like "delayed sword" or somesuch. Anyway, the number of moves in the form I saw was definitely up there...hundreds, perhaps? Regardless, that is alot, no bones about it.

However, the way that the Okinawan forms work is a bit different. Imagine a two person set of 20 techniques...lets say for example, the Yawara Kata list that is common in Judo and jujutsu. Now imagine stringing all of those "techniques" together and...this is the key...combining all of the movements that repeat as well as collapsing movements that look the same into the same move.

This is the real genius behind the Okinawan kata. They are much more complex then they appear because the multiplicity of functionality of each and every move. If kenpo forms are doing the exact same thing as the Okinawan Kata with their application structure, then Dr. Dave may very well be correct in his assessment.

 

[Flying Crane]

Very interesting. Kenpo forms look like all of the "one-steps" strung together. I suppose that each sequence is what you guys are calling a "technique" like "delayed sword" or somesuch. Anyway, the number of moves in the form I saw was definitely up there...hundreds, perhaps? Regardless, that is alot, no bones about it.

Essentially, yes that is what it is. Kenpo has a curriculum of what we refer to as "Self Defense Techniques". These are prescribed responses for specific types of attacks, and can include what could be seen as a lot of overkill. Lots of followup strikes that can reach the point of rediculous, but that's for a different discussion. And yes, they all have standardized but funny names like "Delayed Sword", "Parting Wings", "Intellectual Departure", etc. You have probably seen some of the other threads that discuss specific SD techs. I believe EPAK has about 154 SD techs in the curriculum, while Tracy Kenpo has about 381. Al Tracy was an early student of Ed Parker in the 1950s and early 1960s. While Mr. Parker continued to modify the system, Tracy decided to keep everything as it was in the early days (or so he claims at any rate), and this was at least in part the cause of their splitting. At any rate, many of the forms, esp. the longer and more advanced ones, are constructed with these SD techs. There is argument as to whether or not the Tech existed first and the form was created from them, or if the form was created and then techs pulled from them. I am a proponent of the first theory. But at any rate, each series of movement in the form is a specific SD tech, usually done on both sides. Like I said, I don't know this form, but I believe the techs are all defenses against weapon attacks. Or that might be number 7 or 8, I really dunno. This particular form probably has somewhere between 15-20 SD techs in it, all done on both sides.

However, the way that the Okinawan forms work is a bit different. Imagine a two person set of 20 techniques...lets say for example, the Yawara Kata list that is common in Judo and jujutsu. Now imagine stringing all of those "techniques" together and...this is the key...combining all of the movements that repeat as well as collapsing movements that look the same into the same move.

This is the real genius behind the Okinawan kata. They are much more complex then they appear because the multiplicity of functionality of each and every move.

This is what I meant when I suggested that the Okinawan kata may be somewhat more open to creativity and interpretation, in applying the movement from the kata. Since very specific and named SD techs are found in the form, this gives a very obvious interpretation of how to utilize the movement. On the other hand, it may also limit the Kenpo person to only that one interpretation, rather than seeking out multiple ways to utilize the same movement. The kenpo way in this is, in my opinion, great for beginners in helping them understand the form. But in the long run, if you don't explore and look for creative ways to understand the movement, it might leave you stunted. The problem with kenpo forms as I see it is that because they are made up of these SD techs, the movement is very specific and methodical. This might essentially establish the one interpretation as the only interpretation possible. While the somewhat more generalized movement in an Okinawan kata might leave more room for creative interpretation.

If kenpo forms are doing the exact same thing as the Okinawan Kata with their application structure, then Dr. Dave may very well be correct in his assessment.

I kind of don't think so, per above.

 

[Brother John]

YES!!
I think it was Very viable as a system of training.



Why?
Because it contained the Basics, and that's all you really need.
...the basics.
Not that the system didn't develop, evolve and become even better... I think that it did. But as it was, it was a Fine martial art.
..and in the hands of an instructor like Ed Parker Sr., it would have been Great!

Your Brother
John