Kajukenbopr Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 I've seen some posts on the forums about people who train or have trained in Kenpo and watch and do not speak up when people say it is not an effective art.Now, I dont know if its because they think what they've seen or been taught is worthless, but to me it is an insult if someone says Kenpo is not an effective art - it is part of Kajukenbo- so I know for a fact that it is not useless in a fight.Or is it because there are few Kenpo pratitioners here in the forums??. I want to know, because I am proud to say I practice a style that was born from Kenpo and I dont like to have its name thrown into the mud by saying it is useless.If you are Kenpo and think you can honestly say it is a good MA and very handy in a fight, come on, say it. Share with the rest of us what you have learned and what you think. <> Be humble, train hard, fight dirty
Pacificshore Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 There is good Kenpo and there is bad Kenpo. Anyone who says it's usless either had a bad experience, is a lousy practicioner, or wants to stir the hornets nest Di'DaDeeeee!!!Mind of Mencia
parkerlineage Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 I think the lack of response mostly stems from the fact that Kenpo practicioners are few and far between on this forum. There are a lot of people who have learned some of our forms from videos, or seen a demo or been to one class or something, but I've yet to run into a mass of rank and experience other than a few.I try to stand up for us when I see it needed, but again, we're vastly outnumbered. Every time I start a good thread, it runs for a few days, and then nobody posts on it anymore.*sigh*...yet we struggle on...or something. Peace;Parkerlineage American Kenpo Karate- First Degree Black Belt"He who hesitates, meditates in a horizontal position."Ed Parker
JimmyNewton Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 i dont really thinnk it bouls down to "good" styles or "bad" styles" but from good instructors/bad instructors. my sensei is 4th Dan in okinawan Shorin Ryu, but also had 3rd dan in tae kwon do in the 80's.just because he doesnt teach tae kwon do any more doesnt mean it is no good, because he has showed us things from both arts.i dont know if you watch ulitmate fighting, but the new champion, Chuck liddel is a kenpo guy and he is amazing. "The wise and successsful will always be met with violent opposition by mediocre minds."
karateka477 Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 my friend does kenpo when he can get to class. what he knows now is good for him even if some people thinks its bad. in the words of a friend who cares what martial art you know just please learn at least one. shorei kai=graceful flowing
mattys Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 I for one, am an Okinawan Kenpo practicioner, and I find it insulting to hear someone say kenpo is an ineffective art, especially considering that most modern traditional arts are offshoots of Kenpo. Take a look at Shorin-ryu, or Goju-ryu, there are techniques and kata found in these styles that have been taken from their root art, kenpo.
ivette_green Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 Kenpo is a style of boxing? Sorry if I'm totally wrong, could some one give me a better description? "Don't tell me what I can't do."
Sauzin Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 Yea I can help you with that description.Kenpo means "fist law" and it is just about anything. It's basically a synonym for "martail art". A kenpo stylist may be a form of Okinawan Karate (Like myself) or they might be a George Dillman follower, or they might be a Ed Parker follower, or they might be a Hawaiian kenpo follower (like yourself), or they might be a kung fu stylist (such as shoulin kenpo)So to put this simply, if you don't see anyone standing up and defending Kenpo it's because Kenpo could be anything. You really need to be more specific and then we can talk about effectiveness. Because if you put a George Dillman "ryukyukenpo" guy up next to an Ed Parker "American Kenpo" guy you wouldn't just be talking apples and oranges. You'd be talking grapefruit and zucchini. The only two things that stand between an effective art and one that isn't are a tradition to draw knowledge from and the mind to practice it.
Sauzin Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 I for one, am an Okinawan Kenpo practicioner, and I find it insulting to hear someone say kenpo is an ineffective art, especially considering that most modern traditional arts are offshoots of Kenpo. Take a look at Shorin-ryu, or Goju-ryu, there are techniques and kata found in these styles that have been taken from their root art, kenpo.I'm sorry mattys, but that's just flat out wrong. It's more the other way around. Okinawan Kenpo founder Shigeru Nakimura took a lot from Shorin-ryu. Odo, who your Sensei learned from took even more from Shorin-ryu. I'd say 90% of Okinawan Kenpo has Shorin-ryu roots. Not the other way around. Goju wasn't even around at the time and it came almost entirely from China. Neither have any roots in Okinawan Kenpo. The only two things that stand between an effective art and one that isn't are a tradition to draw knowledge from and the mind to practice it.
wingedsoldier Posted July 9, 2005 Posted July 9, 2005 from my perspective, underestimating a kenpo practitioner is a big mistake. the best fighters i have ever met personally are my teacher and his former students, and they are the last people i would want to fight on the streets, cause i've seen them in action. and last time i checked, breaking bones was always pretty effective.
Recommended Posts