I've been doing Nick Cerio's Kenpo for a while now (related to Ed Parker's). My school has never been involved in any tournaments. The focus is on practical self defense, so we perform techniques such as eye gouges and breaks fairly often. NCK is a composite of techniques mostly from karate, ju jutsu, and K.S. Chow's kenpo. It consists mostly of hand techniques, and of its few kicks almost none are higher than the solar plexus (the two basic kicks are front kick to the solar plexus and rising instep kick to the groin). Its self defense techniques as defenses against a variety of techniques from your basic punches to bear hugs, headlocks, and wrist and lapel grabs. The difference between kenpo and kempo, as far as I have read, is fairly insignificant. It is ultimately just a spelling difference (there is, I am told, a particular japanese character that normally stands for an N sound, but when followed by a P sound becomes an M sound - so both are pronounced "kempo"). I have read that schools that use the "kenpo" spelling are usually modern self defense oriented systems (like mine) while schools that use the spelling "kempo" are usually more traditional systems. I've never been able to verify that myself though. As far as a kickboxer versus a kenpo student? I hate to see this, but it depends on a lot, mostly the two martial artists and the context. In the ring, a kickboxer would probably win most of the time. The rules are set up to favor him, and the purpose of the encounter more closely match the kickboxer's training (winning in the ring, rather than self defense). On the street, I'd say the kickboxer still has a pretty big advantage, mostly because most sport martial artists train physically a lot more, and also because someone who did ONLY kenpo as their martial art would have trouble defending against tough kicks. Kenpo (NCK at least) is mostly designed as a self defense system, and its techniques more often than not have an unskilled attacker in mind. My 2 cents.