delta1

Look at the SE Asian martial arts like Krabi Krabong, Viet Vo Tao, Silat, etc. They were develped to be used in wet, muddy, slippery environments (like jungles). Look at their stances and footwork, then see if there is anything similar in your style. What I've seen of them had a lot of twists and kneels. They tend to redirect and unballance the opponent.

For standing wrist locks, we try to move and fold the arm in such a way as to relieve pressure on the joint while maintaing good ballance and position. Often you can convert the escape to a strike, or make it a simultaneous strike. Sometimes you can reverse the lock if you time it right. But I'm not too sure about fliping a lock. Maybe if I see it in the next Matrix video I might be convinced... .

True. I do Yang Taiji, and it not only works on chi developement and channeling, it is structured (body structure) so that it does not impede the flow of qi. Qi is an integral component, not just something that you might add to your art at some later date.Taiji starts the understanding and developement of the skills necessary to use qi immediately. It teaches you to use qi not only in a fight, but in everyday life as well. If you can find a good school, I'd recomend Taiji. It will enhance any art you do, or will stand alone as a good style by itself.

I know you can roll to get out of some locks, but I've never done, or seen, a flip to escape a lock. I guess anything's posible... .

I flip a lot- usually when I want to start a fight! Actually, I've seen some interpretations of Tai Chi where they use flippy, spinny, somersaulting moves. Just goes to show how diverse and flexable TCC is. But I wouldn't do it that way. Too easy to get your root destroyed!

I live in an area where most of the martial arts schools are TKD, but they are all non-traditional, more combative oriented TKD. I just signed up for one of these schools, and start next week. The schools in this area train the traditional stances, i.e. front and back stances. But when they fight (and I've spared a bunch of them), they all use a fighting stance that is similar to the basic Hapkido stance. I have seen them use the back stance periodically, but have yet to see a front stance used in a match. My question is, do any of you train and use traditional TKD stances in a fight, or do you use a non-traditional fighting stance? Or maybe both? Which do you prefer and use the most? I'm curiouse because one of the things that intrigues me is transfering the principles found in the TKD stances and useing them in the fighting stance. But I also think I can see some uses for the TKD stances and footwork. So I thought I'd ask some of you that have been doing this for a while.

Getting you in shapedepends more on the school than the style. But generally the grappling arts will get you in the best all around shape. Most are good for self defense as well. Easy is a pretty subjective term. But if you mean quick to learn and good retention in a crisis, go with one of the para military styles like American Combato, Krav Maga (if you can find good KM), or the WWII fighting systems (hard to beat in this category). There are some really good hybrid systems out there nowdays. I'd look for one of them. Advantages: the styles are compatable, lots of people on the same program to work with, you can spar useing all your combined skills, and you don't have to do the additional work of blending multiple systems. Look for a system that includes stand up fighting at ALL ranges (especially in close), joint locks and throws, ground fighting, and practical weapons.

Well, I went and did it today. I changed styles (sort of). I signed up with a Freestyle TKD class that I've worked out with for about the last four years any way. They are not traditional TKD, and they also do Modern Arnis and a little aiki and grappling. I'll still be doing some Kenpo, but I'm not able to continue with the school I was with so I'm having to make adjustments. I am still doing Taiji also. In some ways it's tough to do this. I really enjoy Kenpo. But in other ways I'm sort of looking forward to it. I can see a lot of the principles at work in TKD, and one of the things I want to do is convert some of their moves to utilize these principles in their fighting stance. This group already does some of this because they do their one steps and self defenses as traditionally taught, then they do them on a moving or resisting partner. They also string moves together to make techniques, similar to Kenpo. Any how, we'll see how it goes.

I was wondering, what the heck is a hurricane kick?

We use the snap and thrust side kicks. The snaping side kick is kept low and quick, used to attack his base. Not a lot of power, but it is fast and effective. Thrusting side kicks, as Pacificshore said, require you to get your hip into them. You also get more leg extension, and they are a power kick. They can be done a little higher. A TKD guy I work out with does a side kick in close that is so fast and so powerful, and so well timed, it is hard to defend against. The TKD guys hate it when I move in close, so he works this kick a lot. If I don't pick it up quick enough and jam him or move, he can launch me across the room with that kick.

The blind side, at least as I've allways heard it used, is positional. Say your opponent is facing you in a 45' stance, his left foot forward. Immagine a central line running from your center to your opponents center. If you can move off that central line about 5 to 15 deg., and at the same time check his lead (left) hand/arm, you can move past his peripheral vision (at least partially) while at the same time momentarily preventing him from turning to face you. You now control his center line, and thus also the central line, and are positioned for a blind side attack- to his left side and at the limmits of his peripheral vision. The WC guys love to do this to you when they catch you violating your own centerline, like when you throw one of those pretty inward blocks too far across your body.

American Kenpo is both fast and powerful. But fast is not allways better. We learn that there are many times you want to delay a strike, maybe just a quarter beat, so that he has time to react. Example: upperecut to the solar plex- if you wait just a second his head will come in range of your knee. Knee strikes make use of the largest muscle groups in your body, giving great power. Also, you can help him over by craneing the back of his kneck, which gives a little more momentum to his reaction; and your knee meets his force to compound the effect. Of course, if your shot didn't land just right, and you aren't going to get the reaction, another fast move might be necessary. With proper body mechanics, you can have some fast, powerful strikes. But we need to learn when to move fast and when it might be better to move slow. Linear strikes are quicker, but circular moves can also be quick. Another way to increase speed is to eliminate wasted motion. Strike from point of origin, never chamber first. Learn to flow- instead of pulling your fist back after a punch, convert it to an elbow strike, for example. Stay loose until your strike makes contact, then momentarily tense for the blow. Footwork and stance changes add to both speed and power. Make your strikes blocks and your blocks strikes- a two for one thing, cuts time in half. Just some thoughts. These concepts are found in a lot of martial arts styles besides Kenpo, so there's a good chance yours uses at least some of them. Flow is the biggest thing I see lacking in a lot of arts, but there are several that do a great job of it. Wing Chun and JKD, and all the internal arts I know of, have good flow. Most any CMA and FMA also. Be interesting to hear what other arts use these, or other (I didn't list them all), concepts for speed.

I think you are right to be concened about that. The best example I've seen was working out with some FMA types. They did FULL contact with sticks. They usually used padded sticks, and those hurt like ****! But sometimes they go 'live stick', where they use unpadded sticks. Everyone is noticably more timid against the real deal. They don't take nearly as many chances or try as many new and different moves. It's the same with hard contact sparing, though the pads take some of the force. If you have a partner you trust and you both have good control, try fighting with only a mouthguard and cup, and maybe a pair of Kenpo or UFC type gloves (light padding, fingers free for open hand techs and grabs). But moderate your force so as to not permanently dammage each other. And I'm seriouse- you really have to trust your partners control (mental and physical), his character, and his judgement. He also has to trust you. Spar for learning, not to 'win', and you aren't as likely to take the questionable shot. Not saying don't try to win, just that it shouldn't be your primary focus. Enjoy!

fireka, I understand your frustration. And working out with other stylists as an interim measure is a good thing. But as a long term solution I doubt it would work very well. I can empathize, but I can't change the way things are. References are great, and as a means to continue for a while until you get to where you can join another school they are a good option. But you'll never be as good or learn as well as with a good instructor. I'm not suggesting that you give up, or that you not work with videos, books, or other martial artists. I'm just saying that when you can you should find a good school and move forward. And don't get discouraged in the meantime when you aren't learning as much or as fast, or as well, as you would like. I'm talking from experience here. I'm in a lot the same position as you are in some ways. I may be looking at some changes, possibly a style change. It is extremely difficult to leave a style and a school that you love. But if I've learned anything in fifty years of existence it is that life is not fair. We can either give up, or make the best of things and move on. You sound like you want to move on, but you are having a problem making adjustments. The two go together, so my advise is to reasses yur options and do what you have to. And make a long term plan. It may not work out, but it is something to keep you focused and moving in the right direction. Good luck.

I agree with you there. But don't feel too bad- I've heard people from a lot of different styles make the same complaints about varying standards. I do have to hand it to the Japanese arts guys, though. By and large they seem to be a very well drilled bunch. With so much variety and so many interesting ways to train, we are sometimes tempted to neglect our basics.

Sure. AK is noted for its flow and its practical self defense methods. It has no wasted motion and has a reputation for being very fast but powerful. AK is a technique based training system, and each technique is like a mini kata. Superficially, the techniques teach you to defend against almost any concievable attack. But they are actually a vehicle to teach you to move, and to teach the principles and concepts of fighting. The techniques start off fairly simple, then get more detailed as your skills and your understanding increase (detailed doesn't mean fancy, just more technical, more principles and concepts are stressed). Our early forms are more like drills, then they progress to technique forms where techniques are done on the opposite side, you borrow and flow from one technique to another. We learn to set up a reaction in our opponent and to work off that reaction. Timeing, angular relationships, spatial and dimensional control are important. Understanding is stressed along ith the physical skills. AK has a complete arsenal of strikes, and teaches fighting at all ranges. Done correctly, it is a very physical art also. You start learning a technique easy, getting moves and positioning down with a compliant partner. Then he works up the force of the attack a little at a time untill it simulates street force. Then you start working on the modifications, the 'what ifs' (when things go wrong). There is some debate in AK about whether techniques were meant to be done exactly as written in a fight. I'm of the school of thought that says they were not. I know they can, and I know from first hand accounts that they have in seriouse fights. But They don't allways, and no matter how many techniques you have they could never cover every concievable situation. But the system does teach a full encyclopedia of motion in such a way that it is internalized and reaction and movement become instinctive. I'll give a quick example of how it works. The Shotokan guy I was working with on 'slaps' and heel palm strikes was twice my size and a grappler as well. One of the things I wanted to show him was a defense against a rear bear hug, arms pinned. To do the technique that used a couple of effective heel palms his attack had to be such that I could move in width (a little to the side) but not in depth or heighth. While I was trying to explain that, he attacked- hard! His attack was a little different than any I've worked with in that he immediately started to sling me to my left. His left foot steped back to @ 7:00 and he was transfering his weight to that foot, getting his body into the attack. I immediately steped back into a right forward bow, my left foot between his feet, thus stabilizing my base. This was a move found in another rear bear hug technique, but it was meant to buckle his right knee outward and open his groin for a rear heel palm and claw. Unfortunately, due to the variation of the attack, my leg was positioned so that it blocked his groin. So as I steped back and settled into my stance I delivered the heel palm to the junction of his pelvic girdle and his left leg- which is a variation that I had worked on some time ago and had forgotten about. He buckled drammatically and created more than enough space for me to work. I rotated my left shoulder into him as I pivoted into a left neutral bow (a variation from another technique) and drove him back. He had a shocked look on his face as I finished with a left side elbow to the mandible and simultaneous right heel palm to the sternum, both pulled of course. So, did I think of all this while I worked? Not even! I didn't have time. But at each step of the defense I was in familiar territory, even though not exactly the same, and the moves just came.

It is a good thing you kept an open mind. If you've read many of my posts, you know I am an advocate of cross training, working out with and learning from other stylists. But I advise you not to take it to the extreme you are talking about. You need a base style both to teach you the concepts and principles of the martial arts and as a benchmark- a constant which you can compare what you are learning to. The principles are pretty much constant in the martial arts, but their applications varry considerably from style to style. And the concepts can be really confusing if you don't have a base understanding in at least one art. For example, Wing Chun centerline theory and Kenpo dimensional control theory are closely related, but also very different. On the surface, the WC theory is easy to visualize. But believe me, when you face a practitioner who really understands how to use it, you discover it is a little more complex. Having some understanding of my own styles related theorys helps me to understand what I'm dealing with better. There is more to the martial arts than simply basics, though they are the foundation. The foundation is meant to support a greater understanding, not just a set of skills to be mastered. Hopping from class to class, you will never get past this basic stage. And you will likely find that the basics you do learn will conflict with each other when you try to apply them. My advise is to work out with as many different stylists as possible. But stay with one base, and learn it well.

Yes. It's a great training aid, as lon as it doesn't end up on one of those funniest video shows. Or worse, like the Star Wars Kid!

Geez, az, I'm not votin' on that! Which is best for you? AK works for me, but not for everybody. As for hardcore, you'll have to tell me what you mean. AK has a rep for being brutal and destructive, and it is definately a hard contact art (disclaimer: you can add water to anything, but all you have then is a mess that looks like it might have been a ma once). If you mean hardcore traditional, Kyokushin probably is the pick.

Good discussion, and I agree with all that has been said. There is another basic type of sparing- SLOW SPARING, where you both move at half or three quarter speed. This allows you to work more on technique. It also lets you better see attacks and openings developing, and that information is commited to subconsious memory. It will vastly improve your full speed sparing. There is a tendency to speed up, and not many of your attacks will get through (no one is going to let you hit them in slow motion!). But that is ok- this is training, not competition. There are a LOT of variations on all these basic types. Did you want to get into that, or just stick with the reasons/advantages of sparing? The biggest advantages I see to sparing in general is: The only way to learn to fight, is to fight. The only way you'll know what works for you, and what needs more work, is to put it to the test. It can also teach humility, but I'm not allways sure that is an advantage.

It is based on existing oriental arts. The martial arts were initially imported to Japan- should they have not modified them, or the names, to fit their culture? You infer that Mr. Parker was a fraud, but you give no reason or evidence othr than that you don't like his art. Your posts illustrate the bias I was talking about. Look- history, tradition, protocols- all are important. They can help you understand where your art comes from, why things are as they are, and they can teach values. But when you become so bound up in them, which seems to be your attitude, you loose sight of the purpose and they become an end in themselves. You have the form of honour, respect, all the values the arts are meant to teach. But you have no understanding. Go tell yourself you've learned these values- then take cheap shots at those who've done great things in the martial arts. You have no understanding, and not even the courage to say plainly what you mean and why. You infer Mr. Parker lied about his training and experience. You may actually believe that, but you are deceiving yourself- not just about this, but about the values you develope along with your skills, and about your character. I train with a lot of different stylists. Most martial artists do have respect for each other, and share a bond with a common interest. I find a lot to admire in traditional arts as well as other non traditional arts. I also have found many who keep to themselves in the traditional camp, as well as the non traditional, and those ma's tend to be very dogmatic in their approach. I don't put them down for this, nor do I disrespect them. But I don't stand quietly when one of them starts spewing garbage about other arts, or their founders. That type person I find to be obnoxious, and I do judge them a little harshly. Edit/Note to Moderators: I've reviewed this post, and it is a little blunt. If you decide to delete it, I won't take offence. But I'm going to let it stand, as is, with apologies to any forum members who find it in bad taste. I personally find the comments about Mr. Parker to be in very bad taste, and think the author needs to be challenged, which I did.

American Kenpo does not claim to be a 'traditional' art, and we are not hidebound by the traditions of a culture foreign to us. Nor do we assume anything is worthless because it doesn't follow a bunch of protocals often not even found in the present culture of the parent society. And we trace our lineage back to the 20th century and Mr. Parker. You seem so caught up in your own quest for the ancient secrets that yu cannot view the claims of others outside this narrow context. Kindly don't make our claims for us and in return we won't tell you to go ... !

Ma'm, you sure said a lot in just a few words!

The Tracy brothers left Ed Parker early on in order to pursue a more marketable approach to Kenpo. From what I've seen, they tend to rush through their techniques without the depth of understanding of American Kenpo. Shaolin Kenpo and American Kenpo share common origins, so there is a lot of similarity in the two styles. MAjor differences would be in training methods and AK's emphasis on understanding principles. Sorry you didn't like what you saw of American Kenpo. Possibly you didn't see it done right, or you didn't understand what you saw. I suspect that you are also a victim of the prejudice that seems to go with many Japanese arts. AK is thought of by many JA practioners to be a 'slap art'. I worked with a Shotokan guy not long ago who thought that, and in particular he didn't like heel palm strikes. I had him attack me and countered with mostly heel palms. I also showed him how those 'slaps' could be inserted between major strikes to eliminate the wasted motion inherent in styles that teach rechambering, how they can be used to convert and salvage a failed strike, how much dammage they can do with often just minimal effort. Any way, he now has a better opinion of Kenpo and 'slap strikes'. All I'm saying is don't be too quick to judge other arts. I've been guilty of that also, and I eventually find out that I was wrong. Usually it is a lack of understanding that leads to incorrect judgementsabout those arts. I used to think of Taiji as a worthless hippie dance, now I study it. Heck, there was a time I didn't think too highly of Shotokan!

Uugghhh??? Exactly what martial art are you teaching yourself? What credentials do you have to teach an art? What references are you useing? Are you the only one in class? My guess is that this is not your first martial art. Self teaching just doesn't work when training a martial art system. Sorry.