What is Kenpo Good For?

[wingchun100]

Are you kidding me right now? I have seen PLENTY of other people share a similar opinion on this site multiple times. The only way sparring "wing chun vs. wing chun" or "kenpo vs. kenpo" or whatever would work...is if everyone else on the street practiced the same style. But they don't, so if all you have trained against are people attacking you with the tools found in your system...well, good luck.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Are you kidding me right now? I have seen PLENTY of other people share a similar opinion on this site multiple times. The only way sparring "wing chun vs. wing chun" or "kenpo vs. kenpo" or whatever would work...is if everyone else on the street practiced the same style. But they don't, so if all you have trained against are people attacking you with the tools found in your system...well, good luck.

It may interest you to know I have trained with different systems, and while the rules change on what you are allowed to do to your attacker, the attacks don't really change. So no I am not Kidding.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

how Kenpo/Kempo is or isn't street effective etc.

When I had my commercial school, my school was just few blocks away from Tony Martinez's Kempo school.

Tony and I had sparred one time (we were both young back then). He was very good with very fast hands. Later on I had sparred with many other Kempo Karate guys. They all like to drop their leading arm straight down. When I punched at their head, they would use a haymaker (they may call that ridge hand) to block my straight punch, and then hit on the side of my head with that haymaker. I have no doubt that the Kempo Karate is an effective combat art.

page2

 

[Touch Of Death]

When I had my commercial school, my school was just few blocks away from Tony Martinez's Kempo school.

Tony and I had sparred one time (we were both young back then). He was very good with very fast hands. Later on I had sparred with many other Kempo Karate guys. They all like to drop their leading arm straight down. When I punched at their head, they would use a haymaker (they may call that ridge hand) to block my straight punch, and then hit on the side of my head with that haymaker. I have no doubt that the Kempo Karate is an effective combat art.

page2

Not all Kenpo guys like to do that. I sparred a guy once that dropped his lead from another school, I remember wondering if it wasn't vulnerable to a pull-drag knife edge kick. It was.

 

[wingchun100]

It may interest you to know I have trained with different systems, and while the rules change on what you are allowed to do to your attacker, the attacks don't really change. So no I am not Kidding.

Well good for you. There ARE some people who still practice that wAy. Otherwise it wouldn't be a sentiment I have seen expressed numerous times on this site.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Touch Of Death]

Well good for you. There ARE some people who still practice that wAy. Otherwise it wouldn't be a sentiment I have seen expressed numerous times on this site.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can find people expressing all kinds of opinions on this site. But if that proves it to you, I won't try to argue.

 

[jorgemp]

Are you kidding me right now? I have seen PLENTY of other people share a similar opinion on this site multiple times. The only way sparring "wing chun vs. wing chun" or "kenpo vs. kenpo" or whatever would work...is if everyone else on the street practiced the same style. But they don't, so if all you have trained against are people attacking you with the tools found in your system...well, good luck.

A man had a mistake: to fight with his fists against a boxer:

But this other guy used his feet:

 

[Brother John]

We're hearing things all the time about how Kenpo/Kempo is or isn't street effective etc. The same is true of every MA out there. The answers from practitioners range from: "Heck yeah this is street effective as is!" to "Not really, but I do it for the love of the art." to "Well, it's good for the reflexes and everything, but it couldn't really be used to fight with without modification."

When I read that Sheriff memo that Doc posted I thought I'd start a separate thread to discuss this aspect of it. Is Kenpo effective for real fighting? If not, why do you do it?

The point of this is to figure out whether Kenpo in particular and the Martial Arts in general are worth pursuing if one is looking to learn how to fight. If not, why did the Masters of old create it? Why did they do it the way they did?
Did fights happen differently than they do now?
Did untrained attackers attack differently [having been exposed to the existence of traditional MA techniques form the media] than they do now and thus allowed the traditional techniques to work then where they wouldn't now a days?
Have they evolved into something that doesn't work, but that used to work the way it was first taught?
Has too much showiness crept in?
Has the need to teach it to the masses watered it down?
Too much point sparring crept in?
Do the techniques work, but only if they are applied correctly, or do they not work at all as is and always have to be modified?
If they DO have to be modified, why were they created the way they were in the first place rather than the way that really works?

In other words: What is Kenpo good for? If it's not good for fighting as is, why are we doing it as is?

Wow Dan, that's a good many questions.

I've got to confess that having been abscent from MT for a good long time I'm coming late to the party here and haven't yet taken the time to read even the very first reply (looks like by some fella named "ChineseKempoJerry") ...but I hope to when I get more time. SO if I'm just rehashing what several others have said.....ignore and be patient with your brother...

Kenpo is NOT good for fighting at all. You (nor anyone else) can fight With it one whit.
Because...
Kenpo doesn't fight. Kenpoists may, but when they do...they don't "Use Kenpo"...they use their mental/physical toughness, their instincts (well or poorly developed) their own sense of body-mechanics (Raw OR Cultivated) and their body (well or poorly developed). Nothing else. If they've trained well in Kenpo, under instructors/coaches who know what they're doing....then hopefully EACH of these aspects of themselves will be Well developed and well cultivated. If not, then they'd better have a good set of genetics and a heavy stick.

Kenpo isn't a "Fighting Art", because NO art can fight. It's a system (strategy / body of knowledge / method of practice) for how to develop and cultivate a fighter's:
1. mental/physical toughness
2. their instincts
3. their sense of body-mechanics (habits of motion)
4. their body

IF their training (be it boxing, Gong-Fu, Karate, Savate, Silat, Judo, Ken(M)po...etc) does not address and strive to highten each of these, then it's probably left them at a disadvantage and they should practice being Very Very courteous, friendly and avoid large crowds, bars and public transportation.

We all too often talk of an evaluation of our art or the arts of others as though the ART or system of training that they went through were an independant organism in and of itself that one could heft and smack another with. Kenpo doesn't 'fight'. It's a concept / paradigm as to how to prepare to fight.

THEN....talking of an "art" as a whole isn't all that helpful just because in the end it's not the art that matters but each individual artist. Even if you're evaluating how well any particular art makes an artist, how well suited it is to prepare one for fighting......it's still not all that useful, because it's still not a "whole". For instance: my general (VERY VERY general) sentiment toward two particular arts: Olympic Tae Kwan Do and Kajukenbo. ((hope I don't hurt anyones feelings)) I feel that in GENERAL: Kajukenbo's usual curriculm and training style is 'good' for preparing one for real world fighting while I feel the exact opposite toward Olympic Tae Kwan Do!
BUT...and this is a big one..... If we squared off black belts from each system....I'd still put my hard earned money down on the OTKD guy who'd trained with ALL his heart in a very dedicated gym under the coaching of experienced instructors...... than on the half-hearted Kaju black belt who did the bare minimum to get by in a school that lets people advance by doing the bare minimum to get by.
period

I'd take a masterful crayon drawing on a napkin over a sloppily done oil painting on canvas ANY day.

Can Kenpo fight? No
Can Kenpoists fight?? I've known many that SURE CAN....and many more that should just make friends with the biggest kid in class and hope for the best.

Your Brother (not the biggest kid)
John

 

[wingchun100]

You can find people expressing all kinds of opinions on this site. But if that proves it to you, I won't try to argue.

That's not my point. The point is it isn't like that was the first time anyone has said this around here, yet I don't see you or anyone else disagreeing with it until *I* said it.

 

[Touch Of Death]

That's not my point. The point is it isn't like that was the first time anyone has said this around here, yet I don't see you or anyone else disagreeing with it until *I* said it.

It was nothing personal.

 

[dgm1327]

As in any combat system or model, you get out what you put in. A well rounded combat model goes without saying when it comes to providing the best odds of surviving a violent encounter. It's what you do with the material that's important, not what the material can do. Another consideration should be the physical and mental conditioning needed to be successful with the material learned, which can not be over stated.

With Respect,

Damien

 

[hoshin1600]

well despite the fact that this thread is 8 years old now, it seems its still of interest to people and a sensitive subject. to comment on Brother Johns post. i fully understand your points however i feel it's a given that people are different and the true ability to fight is in the person not the art. that being said i feel this logic is a cop out and prevents a deeper look at the subject. there are many die hard practitioners of kenpo/ kempo and with all due respect to them if they havnt done an equal amount of time in other arts then their opinion is biased and very unlikely to reveal any insights. the question could be refined a bit. all things being equal would i be a better fighter if i spent 5 years studying kenpo or 5 years studying some other art ?(pick any art you like). this takes the unknown factors out of the equation and only looks at the art itself. it would be like a side by side comparision of two wall street stock pics to see which one will give the better return/ preformance in 5 years. when questioned in this manner there can be some real insights into our training. the problem is that there has to be a certain amount of introspection done and individual bias must be put aside. easer said then done but the growth from asking these questions can be well worth the uncomfortable truths we may find in ourselves.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

There are 2 kind of people in MA. Those who

- believes in evolution and doesn't mind cross training.
- has loyalty to his style and believe anything added in will be a water down to his style.

If one is not willing to look beyond, there isn't much to discuss in this subject at all.

 

[dgm1327]

There are 2 kind of people in MA. Those who

- believes in evolution and doesn't mind cross training.
- has loyalty to his style and believe anything added in will be a water down to his style.

If one is not willing to look beyond, there isn't much to discuss in this subject at all.

I believe Mr. Parker studied other arts prior to kenpo and afterward. He analyzed many arts along his journey and either modified or incorporated what he found useful into his art. Bruce Lee utilized the same philosophy. They were among many pioneers of their time that cross trained in other arts to improve their combative skill sets. Both were tremendous athletes, brilliant tactitions and possessed an understanding of combatives beyond the normal practioner. A true comparison of kenpo, in essence, is a comparison in ideology of what is useful vs. what is not. The kenpo framework was never meant to stand alone as a combative model without it's core philosophy. The core philosophy of Ed Parker's kenpo is to absorb what is useful and evolve as a fighter through the three phase concept incorprated into his art. This philosophy, when put into practice, should provide the practioner with an endless array of possibilities and concepts to explore.

With Respect,

Damien

 

[Touch Of Death]

There were these two brothers, Sam Ting, and SamDam Ting.

 

[hoshin1600]

There are 2 kind of people in MA. Those who

- believes in evolution and doesn't mind cross training.
- has loyalty to his style and believe anything added in will be a water down to his style.

If one is not willing to look beyond, there isn't much to discuss in this subject at all.

there are also people in the middle. they may see things in other arts that can improve their understanding of their own art. there is nothing wrong with only learning one style. i belive this is important to keep an art going for the next generation. i look at what is happening with language, in 100 years 60% of the languages spoken today will be gone. the same will hold true for martial arts. so preserving a style is important. but this thread is about fighting. the problem is that people assume that learning a martial art equals an ability to fight. one has nothing to do with the other. most arts today are very far removed from true fighting and the people studing them are only doing a kabuki dance. most martial arts are more about fear management rather than danger management. the belief in ones "system" to keep them from harm and the belief in their abilty based on what goes on in the dojo is truly a very alluring cup of cool aid.

 

[Hand Sword]

What is it good for?
Dealing with a haymaker or sloppy kick from a drunk barroom frequenter. Aside from that, not too sure anymore.

 

[drop bear]

there are also people in the middle. they may see things in other arts that can improve their understanding of their own art. there is nothing wrong with only learning one style. i belive this is important to keep an art going for the next generation. i look at what is happening with language, in 100 years 60% of the languages spoken today will be gone. the same will hold true for martial arts. so preserving a style is important. but this thread is about fighting. the problem is that people assume that learning a martial art equals an ability to fight. one has nothing to do with the other. most arts today are very far removed from true fighting and the people studing them are only doing a kabuki dance. most martial arts are more about fear management rather than danger management. the belief in ones "system" to keep them from harm and the belief in their abilty based on what goes on in the dojo is truly a very alluring cup of cool aid.

Just with the invention of good communication and the ability for people around the world to get together and test their stuff has moved martial arts forwards in effectiveness.

We are comparing styles that were used on a small number of specific people to styles that are now global.

We just didn't have the tools then that we have now.

Otherwise I am not sure how you justify the idea that martial arts today is not about fighting. I think true fighting is kind of a romantic notion.

 

[hoshin1600]

let me start by saying that Drop bear is 100% right. the internet and (love it or hate) the UFC has changed martial arts for the better. it has made many wake up and think to themselves that what they have been doing is not enough. back before the 80's if you trained in more then one style you were a heretic and looked down upon. many of us did what was refered to cross training. it was considered a poor method of learning. that dedication to one art was better. but today MMA is a norm and excepted.

I am not sure how you justify the idea that martial arts today is not about fighting.

the term i would use is psuedo fighting. now many people focus on sport fighting and thats fine and legit. however a common sentiment even in these forums is that the value of martial arts is in relation to its ability to teach you real street fighting self defense.
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/115-meet-greet/115267-hi-everyone.html
notice in this thread the comments from the poster about how aplicable an art is to real self defense. also notice the subtle but undercurrent, this ability to fight almost seems like a preocupation. but if one would suggest for a parent to arm their child with a knife for self defense ,,,what kind of lunacy would that be? but we have no problem in thinking in terms of teaching a child self defense? does that child really need to "protect themselves" or is it a deep seated fear in the parent that harm may come to their child and there is a need from the parent to protect. sending the child to karate is a way to ease this fear for the parent. the same hold true for adults most students enter the dojo because at some level there is a fear, a need to protect themselves. a need to feel powerfull, confident and have the ability to fight if needed. many will not agree but the fact is you picked a martial arts class not yoga or dance or soft ball, why?
personaly i train and teach for real self defense. if you want real self defense learn gun tactics and how to quickly take someones life with a knife with minimal engagment, engaging the enemy increases your chance of harm. if you parctice a horse stance with your hand tucked into your arm pits throwing out punches doing kiai and half moon steping your doing an exersize in fear managment.

I think true fighting is kind of a romantic notion.

i think this is true. people either have this Indiana Jones vision in their head about how things will go in a real fight, this stems from the fact that they have no real experience so the imagination fills in the gaps or they have the boogey man fear. that the bad guy is so bad *** that no amount of training will ever be enough. again lack of experience leads to the exageration of the real threat into a super threat.

 

[drop bear]

I think that most people are too hung up on the fighting part of MA's. Honestly, when was the last time someone on forum was in a fight that didn't stem from ego or mouth overloading *** syndrome?

The vast majority of the adults that I know haven't been in a fight of any kind since they themselves were a young person with a big mouth and a lot of ego.

I myself do Kenpo because I like to do it. I enjoy the interaction with my instructors and classmates. I enjoy the hard contact. I always wanted to do martial arts. Now I am.

Two weeks ago.at work. A mate dropped a drunk guy and was holding him for the cops. The friend of the drunk came over the top. So I grabbed him took him to the ground and arm locked him.

Now as much as it seemed like half a fight because we were being nice. If they get one up on us they will kick the crap out of us and be gone before anything can be done about it.

Last week a different mate got plasticed in the face by a chick. Took her back we de weaponed her and dragged her out.

This weekend has been pretty sedate so far.

But yeah fighting is pretty sucky and I would prefer not to be doing it.

The concept of the monkey dance is not realistic. Street fights can be preditory.