Sauzin

Description of Okinawan Kenpo (the art I practice) Lineage: http://www.argedon.de/akka/history/okinawakempo.htm A nice chart to go with it: http://www.ikkf.org/lineage.html Now here is a good list of some of the different Kenpo's you'll see: http://www.martial-arts-toplinks.com/Top_Sports_Martial_Arts_Kenpo_Schools_and_Instruction.html In this list you will find some American, Dillman, Chinese, and stuff they didn't really have any other name for so they called it Kenpo. Interestingly enough, Kenpo or Ch'uan (fist) Fa (law) in Chinese can be applied to just about any art derived from the multitude of different Shaolin schools. So lets see we have a couple of different lineages here theres, Okinawan Kenpo which goes: Wooping Crane>Kanryo Higashionna>Shigeru Nakamura>Seiyu Oyata or Seikichi Odo Then there's Dilmans Ryukyu Kenpo which goes: 3 seminars from Oyata + Shodan in Issinryu from Jimmy Coffman + Wally Jay small circle jujitsue + some Shotokan>George Dillman Then there's American Kenpo which goes vaguely: Shaolin Temple>James Mitose>William K. S. Chow + Street fighting>Edmund Parker Then there's Hawaiian Kenpo which goes: Shaolin Temple>James Mitose>William K. S. Chow Then there's Chinese Kenpo which goes: Shaolin Temple>????? (there is no way to track the amazing number of branch offs from these arts) I think I got that right. I hope this helps, and believe me I’m confused to.

Toothpick bo?!?! Might get a contact bo later?!? Well to each their own. But what is a weapon if you can't make contact with it?

I respect that, really I do. I see the point of forums for things such as comparative arts and discussing similarities and differences. But there is one thing I don't think the martial arts community really understands. The only thing connecting most of the different Kenpo styles out there is a name. Basics and movements are not a lot alike. Not any more then what you would see if you compared any two random martial arts. You can find similarities anywhere but these different Kenpo styles come from completely different roots. It's similar to taking UFC, Goju-ryu, and Tai chi then renaming them Mixed Kenpo, Traditional Kenpo, and Slow Kenpo and then calling them a family. I'm sorry but they aren't. Maybe you need to get a forum together and talk directly to figure this out, but reality has it you'd find more similarities if you went to the comparative arts forum.

But again the above answer only applies to Okinawan Kenpo's. Not George Dilman's, American Kenpo, or any of the Chinese Arts. These arts share no similar kata's with Shorin-ryu or other Shuri-te systems except for George Dilman's Kenpo who's kata bears some resemblance to issinryu's (a blend of go-ju and shorin-ryu) but really they are so different in the way he performs them that they really shouldn't be associated. Dilman doesn't exactly focus on kata fundamentals except for how it applies to pressure points, and that’s only about 10% of what is to be gained from a Shorin-ryu kata. Really when you're talking Shuri-te and Kenpo styles other then Nakamura's lineage then you're talking aples and oranges. Maybe even apples and zucchini.

It always amazes me how much kata can translate to ground work. You don't actually go to the ground (off your feet) in kata, yet it seems to change the way you move. Even on the ground. Not to mention people who practice kata seem to maintain control and balance better when they do go down. I don't really understand the correlation exactly. Some of the movements seem totally different, yet they come naturally and I know kata is the only explanation.

You see, I understand people who use it primarily as a training tool, but I’ve always been a believer in the philosophy you train how you fight. I use horse stances primarily when fighting in close and personal when I need a good semi-deep stance that can go any direction I need it to. Unless I was knocking someone through a wall or had a guy wrapped up I probably wouldn’t punch in it and if I did it would likely be to the side though it’s nice to have either option. This really isn’t a stance I would want to assume until I was fully engaged with an opponent. But my main point is that when you get in close you need to be able to take a push from whatever direction the opponent may choose to apply. With the back up straight and perpendicular you just can’t stay up when grappling. Look at sumo wrestlers. You won’t see straight backs there unless the guy is about to fall over. The knees need to be bent at an angle that allows them to take a lot of weight, like that of your opponent. I am not suggesting that a person employ a higher stance, though the stance I use is a bit higher then some. I am simply suggesting that having an extremely wide stance with a perpendicular back may not lend itself well to what I see as the best uses for this stance.

You are very welcome. Thanks for the thanks!

Here's a link list I put together: I’ll go down the list starting from the cheapest going to the highest quality: 1.)http://www.karatesupply.com/bo_staves.htm - This has about the cheapest weapons bo’s you can find anywhere. $16.19 for a good red oak bo. $13.19 for a jo. And the most amazing thing is only $44.99 for a red oak Eku! 2.)http://www.challengermartialarts.com/redoakbostaff.htm - Good quality red oak bo for only a few cents more $16.95. 3.)http://www.ambersports.com/marartraineq.html - These guys sell hickory bo’s for $48.00 and hickory jo’s for just $25.00. That’s a hell of a deal since hickory is basically the toughest wood out there. Bare none. 4.)http://www.okiadventures.com/html/weapons.html - High quality hand made red oak and hickory weapons. $40.00 for bo and $18.00 for a jo. 5.)http://www.bujindesign.com/weapons_brazilian.html - These guys make a great Brazilian Cherry jo that is just beautiful. Seen it in person. $75.00 6.)http://www.bostaff.com - $85-$100 for just about any wood you want: black cherry, walnut, poplar, white oak, red oak, ash, hickory, maple, birch, basswood and/or exotics – purpleheart, yellowheart, bloodwood, zebrawood, padauk, wenge, jatoba and bubinga. All kinds of customization options. 7.)http://www.murasakikobudo.com/pages/products.html - Beautiful and expertly made purple heart weapons, $80 for a bo and $60 for a jo. Worth every penny. 8.)http://arthagallery.com/index.shtml - These guys specialize in Macassar Ebony. $120 for a bo, $100 for a jo. I’m ordering from these guys. 9.)http://www.crane-mountain.com – Wepon makers of various woods with Sensie Dean’s personal recommendation. E-mail for pricing. 10.)http://sdksupplies.netfirms.com/catalog.htm - Weapons made by Kim Taylor a legend in woodworking. Absolutly the best you can buy. Works with a large variety of woods (you name it, he’s got it). E-mail for price quote. Usually between $100-200. 11.)http://mivasecure.abac.com/kingfisherwoodworks/merchant.mvc - These guys make legendary jo’s. They import highly tested and specially treated hickory, the highest grades of which barely float in water. They have impact resistance that is off the charts. They are recommended by the highest ranking Aiki-jo practictioners in the world. They don’t even use sand paper. They also made the jo’s used in “The Last Samurai”. Prices range between $56.00 and $116.00. I hope to get Sensei one of the $116 ones eventually. A good site to learn about the properties of different varieties of wood in regards to their weapon performance is:http://www.aikiweb.com/weapons/goedkoop1.html I hope this helps!

So about knees I would like to add a couple of things. If your stance is very wide, then pushing your knees out over your feet can hurt them. If your stance is about as wide as your lower leg and foot plus a fist then moving your knees out provides a much stronger and more stable structure. Not to mention protecting them from collapsing at angles that might do damage to them in combat. Even the guy in the first picture has his knees out a bit past what is natural, just not as much as the second guy. If the stance was not so wide it would not seem so stressed in either picture. The major thing I notice about a lot of people’s horse stances is that the back is perfectly perpendicular (straight) to the ground as in the first picture. This is correct in many styles though I really don’t understand why. Having your back straight immediately causes the stance to be off balance if your knees are bent forward much at all. I could understand people who do this trying to get as wide and low as possible, they would constantly feel like they were falling backwards otherwise. The back and hips were not designed to be perpendicular to the ground. Man has a natural cant forward. Using this does several things. It increases balance, lowers the center of gravity, saves the lower back from undue stress, relaxes the upper back muscles creating a more responsive stance, and above all it keeps you from falling over. You see people doing techniques in a horse stance like punching and blocking to the front. If these guys were to hit anything with any real force they would fall backwards. Try it some day. Have someone push you backwards with the back perpendicular then have someone push you backwards with a slight cant forward and your butt out just a little bit like you were going to sit down on something. The difference is dramatic. Imagine if the front liners of a football team were to line in horse stances with their backs perpendicular to the ground. They’d get run over. I’m not suggesting anything as dramatic as a football posture but the principle is the same.

Maybe this will help, Some pointers for making a boken: http://www.uoguelph.ca/~kataylor/bokuto.htm Some variants and measurments: http://sdksupplies.netfirms.com/cat_stdweapons.htm http://sdksupplies.netfirms.com/cat_bokuto.htm Kim Taylor is a master wood worker. There are lots of pictures on his site and some interesting designs. Good luck! -Paul

Oyata claims this never happened and has disavowed Dillman entirely stating that Dillman only took 3 seminars from him and made the rest up. Either way Dillmans rank is not currently recognized by Oyata. Other then the 10th degree certificate that was signed by all his higher ranking students, Dillman's only legit rank is a shodan in Shotokan.

As of current I believe the Ryu Kyu Kempo trademark is still Dillmans. Regardless he proliferated the use of the term to describe his art so 95% of the time when you hear it, it's his system that is being talked about. To further support this, Dillmans karate is the only karate I know of that markets itself as "pressure point karate" which was used to describe it in the original post. My experience with Dillman's students has been very hit and miss. That's the real trick of the thing. Dillman's system isn't really a system. Most people who teach under Dillman have backgrounds in other arts. Sure Dillmans system has kata, but they aren't emphasized or even practiced in some schools. Rather teachers take the kata from their old system and apply Dillman’s interpretation to them. This creates a huge variance in the quality of instructors in his "system". I would suggest going in to it with a bit of skepticism. Pressue points aren't some big secrete that have been discovered in the last decade or two. Their use exists in every system. Don't assume just because they can hit someone on the neck and knock them out that the system is effective. You can do that too, this isn't what a martial art is about. Simple fact of the matter is, if you don't train repetitive technique into muscle memory you will never be able to perform it when it counts. No matter how many pressure points you know, you won't be able to use them without proper techniques, movement, and stance work. These things come from good kata. Without focus on kata, everything else is mute. Its like working one ground fighting joint lock. It won't matter if you're a master at that lock. If you don't have a good basic ground fighting base to work off of, you will never be able to get your opponent into that lock. Same thing with pressure points. Be careful. -Paul

A neat trick regarding arm bars. The first direction you apply force should be lateral to the back side of his arm/shoulder and then down with a bit of a inward twisting of the wrists. This makes for a surprisingly effective arm bar. I'm sure there are people who could resist this with an unbendable arm application, but not very commonly on the first try. Stance would be very important. Of course from a martial perspective, resisting an arm bar would only be used when you need to buy a half a second to do something else. In regards to the arm breaking, if the arm was properly positioned as has been previously described it would be easier to break through a 8" tree trunk.

Hey Joe! Welcome to the forums. Good points. To outsiders, Joe and I are in the same school here in Boise, ID. We work under Sensie Dean Stephens a 9th degree under the late Seikichi Odo. Joe happens to be his son and my senior in the empty hand side of the house. He is very good at what he does and has a lot of experiance (like his whole life growing up under his dad) in weapons and Okinawan Kenpo. He is especially good with the bo, jo, sai, tonfa, and eku. Well now I really have to watch what I post on this forum. Any of it could get back to our class. Man the internet just isn't safe any more!

Good points... There are similarities. I think the biggest ones are just as you said, grappling and the duel arc motions used to generate power in the strikes. I'd say the only real difference in regards to grappling between the bo and jo is leverage. I wouldn't try hooking an opponent's leg with a jo unless the guy was really light. In close though the two weapons are very similar. And I wouldn’t want to downplay the bo's grappling applications. I just wanted to stress the differences I saw so that we don't have people going around thinking they can learn everything there is to know about a bo or a jo just by learning one of them. Thanks for the reply.

I don't know if I agree with you on this one Shorin Ryuu, not entirely anyway. While you can use a jo like an Okinawan bo, I think it is a grave error. I really don't see the jo as a bo that can be used indoors, though I have seen it trained that way. The jo's length gives it several properties that are very unique and really change the dynamic of how it is optimally handled and how the strikes can be performed. A bo is too long to swing like a sword. It is also to long to handle and maneuver form both ends at once. At least half the blocks/parries performed with the jo cannot be done with a bo. The bo makes slip thrusts less necessary due to it's extended range. It also has a slower slip thrust (more distance to slide down). Full thrusts are generally more effective. The most important thing though to me is that the bo and the jo handle a lot differently overall in terms of balance and weight. You just can't get the feel of a good Okinawan bo side strike without the proper length. You can perform it with a jo, but you will never refine the power and timing unless you tirelessly practice with a full length bo. Now I do agree the differences between a tanbo and a bo are greater, slightly. And I do agree that there are basic principles that hold true between a bo and a jo. But not necessarily more then any other two weapons, at least not by much if they are used properly. I would strongly disagree that the techniques are basically the same between a bo and a jo. I see many people train this way and I think they do themselves a disservice in not taking advantage of and learning the unique properties of each weapon.

My sensie has an original pair of Agena sai's. They are a little heavy, but the balance is supurb. They feel uniquely solid and combat ready. I found them extreemly easy to manipulate as the balanced weight moved readily. When using them there is also a real feeling of heritage. Of course I haven't seen any of these new sai's made by the guy who was taught by the original maker, but they seem identical from the pictures. If they are, then I have to say they would be the best sai's you could possibly buy. Even better then Shureido's, and I don't say that lightly.

In regards to jo length I've also been told that it should reach from the ground to the armpit. This length is not for the sake of supporting one's self, but so that as a general rule you can reach both ends of the jo at once. This ability allows for the jo to be quickly used from either end and the length is conducive to many techniques and hand changes that move from either end of the jo. Having it too short doesn't allow for the correct amount of hand spacing on certain blocks and hand changes. Having it two long prevents proper strikes and makes hand changing slower. A common technique wit the jo is to slide one hand to the very end of it and move over the end to the other side of the jo to change grips. This is difficult to accomplish correctly without the correct length.

I would say this: A beginner with a bo would have a slight advantage over a beginner with a sai in open combat. Pure power, distance, and simplicity would be in the bo's favor. An intermediate with a sai would have a slight advantage over a intermediate with a bo because of the sai's innate ability to trap a bo momentarily with the flick of a wrist and the sai’s lethal ability to take advantage of this momentary lack of movement. On an advanced level, I think most advanced weapon practitioners would prefer the bo. But at an advanced level, skill is so much more a determining factor then the weapon that it is impossible to point out any specific advantages/disadvantages that would make a lick of difference.

I think what he is saying is that you could do a kata holding the sai on the wrong end and still find more practical use for them then a nunchaku that is spun around like the video shown earlier. A sai is pretty straight forward. You have a handle, a long pointy thing, and some prongs. While it is possible to use incorrectly (see daredevil), unless you are throwing them up into the air and spinning them around on your fingertips chances are you can find a practical use for them. It's kind of like a knife. Pointy end goes in the opponent. Nunchaku aren't quite so intuitive. When using them it is easy to be distracted by the fact they can spin around real fast thus loosing sight of their martial application.

I agree with everything Shorin Ryuu said, but I think if Python wants to be ably to use the nunchaku as a weapon he's going to have to shift his thinking a bit. First of all what is there to strike at the level that he is swinging? If he strikes would it actually stop someone? What does spinning the nunchaku in small circles really do to an opponent? I understand the reason he swings so low is probably because he got tired of hitting his head, but this wouldn't be a problem if he were extending further away from his body and using his hips a bit. You see the real problem is that I don't think Python is really trying to figure out how to use this tool as a weapon. Which is fine. But I just don't understand why one would come to a martial weapon forum to show off juggling.

So, Spin, to be specific here. You are advocating the use of two sticks tied by a string or a chain to spin around and play with as a “toy”. I don’t understand what this has to do with the “KarateForums ->weapons” forums you are posting in. Here are some places where this might be more relevant: https://www.jugglemania.net https://www.juggle.org https://www.circusarts.org.uk Now if you want to bring any relevant point out of this you could say that this applies to the application of juggling two sticks tied by a string to the defense arts surrounding the weapon known as a nunchaku. But simply put, there is no application. I guarantee that you would have had an easer time learning applicable martial nunchaku without your juggling experience. You’d never know now because you can’t go back and unlearn to find out, but I can tell you that I’ve seen bad habits caused by this in other students and there is a noticeable difference in the time it takes to unlearn this as compared to someone who is starting fresh. I mean you could say that jumping rope would help someone learn nunchaku because it makes them more fit and familiar with swinging things, but if they thought of the nunchaku as a jumping rope then how helpful would that be really? You can compare this to the yo-yo, a Philippine weapon that used to be deadly now used to “walk the dog” and perform “rocking cradles”. But what good is a “rocking cradle” going to do in a fight? This is exactly what kobodo practitioners are trying to prevent. The loss of a weapon’s combat art due to the propagation of “yo-yo” like performances. There’s a whole generation of people out there that think that’s what a nunchaku is about. This is truly a tragedy that many of us are rightfully upset about. Not to mention the concerned that someone is going to go out onto the street and try to defend themselves by spinning a nunchaku around and get themselves killed. I’m just trying to propagate accurate information that won’t get someone hurt. This information is simple. If you practice performance nunchaku, don’t try defending yourself with it. Don’t try teaching it as a defensive art. Don’t even call it a weapon, because it’s not when used in that way. Furthermore when these things are explained to beginners don’t take offense. It’s not like we’re telling you not to juggle, we just don’t want to encourage its practice in a martial arts context.

Well that depends...with Okinwan Kenpo from Odo Seikichi's liniage, weapons are taught from the first day you walk in the door. And there are several instructors, mine included, that teach weapons completely separately. But what you said regarding stances, blocks, etc is exactly what I was trying to convey. It's very difficult. Not impossible, but very difficult. Actually I have yet to see someone overcome their TKD stances and movement who moved to kobudo. And these things are not compatible with kobudo. In fact they can get you hurt.

I seemed like you didn't have a strong understanding of nunchaku applied practically, and in saying that you wanted that, it seemed to me you didn't know what you were asking for. But this is still good, because its a great way to learn about it. I think you are gaining a good picture of what their practical use means. Nunchaku aren't any faster then any other weapon. They are generally seen as martial thug weapons by police who, certainly in the US, look critically on people who use them. This is the main reason I wouldn't use them. I would instead use a cane, or a walking stick. Carrying these things around is easier to justify and doesn't make people think you are looking for a fight. Walking sticks and canes are also very versatile, effective, and deadly when needed. From a purely combative standpoint, any weapon can be effective given the right training, but a nunchaku is not quite as versatile as some. It is harder to control and has some severe weaknesses as far as being trapped, disarmed, or countered. Staffs are great all around weapons with few weaknesses given the right size. Sais are perhaps the deadliest weapons in kobudo. They are like short range guns only faster and more versatile. Sais have the same problem nunchakus have with the police though. You might as well be carrying around a katana. Same with kama's. There effective, but messy. Tonfas are great. Powerful, effective, and very few weaknesses. Good in close and far. Here's a weapon you can take home to you're mother. It's just plain good. There are more, but what I'm really trying to explain here is that weapon training should be inclusive of more then one weapon. The benefits are really exponential. Kobudo or Kobujitsu are the names for Okinawan weapon arts, just the weapon portion. I would highly recommend you find someone who teaches it. I think you will find what you want by doing so.

I'm sorry but I agree with Shorinryu Sensei. If they are learning weapons from an Okinawan Kenpo instructor, then they are learning Kobudo, not TKD. TKD does not do weapons. If a person says they do TKD weapons then they most assuredly have not learned them from their art, and I would start at suspicious and work up from there. TKD does not translate well to Okinawan Kenpo or Kobudo. I know, I've helped teach many. I have 3 students that have been with me for 5 years who started in TKD. They are still having a very difficult time. TKD and weapons doesn't mix well, and when it does it's like learning a new art from scratch, twice. That's how difficult it is. I'm not saying don't do it. I'm saying expect it to be very hard.