A Comparison
A comparison. In the twentieth century There were many really amazing Kempo / Kenpo stylists. This post is primarily concerned with the systems of two. Ed Parker and Olaf Simon approached Kempo / Kenpo differently. Ed Parker primarily used the concept of scenarios as his primary training tool. For example, here is a link to a Jeff Speakman seminar. Notice the specific scenarios. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q17UBJmhgA&mode=related&search= My apologies to all. I had the wrong link. Try it now. Another example is a link to Larry Tatum’s “Tip of The Week”. Once again, note the scenarios. http://www.ltatum.com/TipOfTheWeek.html These are training drills. Actual applications would, of course, vary with the actual attack Olaf Simon’s system primarily used a different concept of drills. Moh uses scenarios as well but it uses drills, far more frequently. (At least, the version I learned did.) I looked around and I was unable to find videos I needed for a comparison. So I’m going for an explanation instead. It was during a test of one of my students. My teacher asked him how many different ways he could defend the same area. My student responded as I had taught him and demonstrated several different ways. It was that unpredictability which my teacher was after. Now I like the look of scenarios. I like a lot of things about them. But I also have a problem with them. When they are unrehearsed, When the defender does not know what is coming, His responses to the attacks often turns sloppy. For example, free sparring turns wild and looks very little like the scenario. I also like the look of what I do. The practice of basics and their applications can be very rewarding. Nor does it matter whether these are done solo or in two man applications. But again, there is another problem. The basics will only carry one so far. Then a more complex grasp of tactics becomes vital. Otherwise, free sparring degenerates into a power and speed debate. Skill becomes less important to the participants (imho). Which do you prefer?

I don't like scenario's too much! It is far too static IMO, attacker uses attack #4 while I defend with defense #5, too reactive for one. Also it teaches one to be expectant of this or that attack and having you to come up with an appropriate defense. You will end up spending so much time learning defences for all kinds of imaginary and unlikely attacks! Let alone that each defense will also have to be tailored to your opponents weight, height,etc... The style I now train is more interested in finding and exploiting your opponents center. This is done primarily through touch and being able to "read" where your opponents energy(intent) is going. When your opponent is out of reach sight will have to be used, by looking at the torso you can detect movement(telegraphing) and you will be able to detect if your opponent is off balance. When I say balance I include root, tension in the body, dis-jointed movements, deformation of the spine, poor weight distribution etc... There are no scenario's per se, only training to be able to adapt to the changes that take place in real time. Drills are used to train particular motions in the form or to train the movement of the energies in your body but not necessarily for self-defense scenario's, though there may be exceptions!

To all, I have not been able to find exactly what I’m after so… I recorded some of my student and myself. (Thanks to my wife for her camera work and my student for his permission to be filmed.) Click on the links within the link. http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=6371ABD7AD6BE96E Regards, MrE2Me2

To all, We have seen our Mo Kempo forms. Here, now, are a few of the forms of American Kenpo, Short 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpzXVyjedJg Short 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty5CwHViJR0 Long 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8UiH8lWXq0 Long 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgbMFttoDkI&mode=related&search= Long 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5NsAxYMe2o&mode=related&search= The American Kenpo Two Man Set http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYz7eD1JlVg&mode=related&search= And here is a link describing one man's perspective. This is his view of how some of them were developed. http://www.sanjosekenpo.com/creationofforms.htm Regards, MrE2Me2 Without prejudice E&OE

To all, It would appear that we aren’t the only Kempo/Kenpo stylists with a grappling problem. I was surfing tonight around another Kenpo forum and I found this. From “Kenpo Talk” which is located here; http://www.kenpotalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3471 A forum member nicknamed “Celtic Crippler” posted this; “The subtitle on Black Belt Magazine reads, "Jeff Speakman Updates Ed Parker's Art." That caught my eye and I immediately flipped to page 74 to read more. According to the article, Jeff Speakman has revamped his curriculum, removing 1/3 of the techniques he used to practice and replaced them with "ground" techniuqes and modified another 1/3 to fit the new fight model.” Needless to say, this has generated some controversy. We just had a similar discussion on this forum a couple of months ago. And under other conditions, I’d have passed this up as redundant. Except that on the one hand, "Celtic Crippler" says of Jeff Speakman; “He cites the upsurge in popularity of MMA and the UFC as a primary reason for the changes as the chances of encountering a trained MMA fighter or someone that will try to emmulate the grappling styles they see on TV on the streets has drastically increased”. While on the other hand, forum member "NickName99" says; “Hell everything we learn that is fun is illegal in the competiation,(eye gouge groin shots). He is tailoring kenpo into a sporting event with some useful ju jit su. “ This reminds me of what Master Terlecki and I were discussing some months ago. Now I practice a non grapping form of Mo and I make no bones about it. In a self defense situation, I’m not going to grapple with someone in a sporting manner. Touch me and I’ll defend myself the way I train, with strikes. None the less, others obviously do not feel that way. Regards, MrE2Me2 Without prejudice E&OE

The goal of the grappler is to get his opponent to ground that goes without saying. If you are taken to the ground you are in the grappler's element and he has taken out of your comfort zone. If you plan to continue to train as a pure stand-up fighter you need to to train 1) how to avoid being taken down 2) how to defend yourself if you are 3) how to safely regain your feet afterwards. There are other things that are important but you should at least be working on these.

Hello Current Student, You posted, “If you plan to continue to train as a pure stand-up fighter you need to to train 1) how to avoid being taken down 2) how to defend yourself if you are 3) how to safely regain your feet afterwards. There are other things that are important but you should at least be working on these.” I would tend to agree. Further, I would say that mma has made us more aware of the dangers a grappler poses. And at the same time, certain moves are illegal in mma and therefore not practiced often. But this last point aside for just a minute. I would agree avoiding takedowns, ground defenses and regaining my feet are the vital ones to concentrate on. Real confidence and real abilities in these areas can only come with skilled practice. Regards, MrE2Me2

To all, I learned a long time ago and I am not a member of the P.H.S. Yet, when I learned, it was mostly about basics; both learning them and applying them. There were some specific defense combinations in the version that I learned. But they were few and not practiced often. I notice that American Kenpo has divided their art into several categories. Among others there is free sparring and “self defense”. These two categories seem quite different from each other. Mostly this difference is in the predictability factor. With “self defense”, both parties know what is coming. With free sparring no one knows what is coming. Now I know that at least one other version of Moh has scenarios. See here for several. http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=sifushawn Do other versions of Moh currently practice these, as well? Regards, MrE2Me2 Without prejudice E&OE

Tournament anyone?
Some thing about TKF have been still eating away at me. I didn't like the stupid form letter that was posted on the other sight. and in re-reading some of the posts, there was finally an inkling of Swanstrom offering up Crossman to do some battle. I thought that was kinda cheap as they have had decades to prove a point. here is a copy of what I had posted on the "grey" website. "Hi Y'all. Glad to see TKF go down in burning flames. Glad the truth got out about this rancid organization. Besides my obvious glee, I would like to invite The (former) TKF, O.E. Simon elite to come on down and see how ya stack up @ the Internationals. Yes, the very same tournament Uncle Oly got hisself a picture referreing(?) at. Maybe you can get a pic of yourself actually competing- you could one up your grand master! After all you call the pathetic representations of forms KENPO 1,2 &3. Let's see what some REAl Kenpoists think of 'em? I know the TKF stance has been to NOT compete in tournaments, but you are freed from that backwards, cowardly view. Though sparring now isn't typical either. It's pretty much full contact continous. I know Monsiuer Swanstrom was freely divying out challenges for Mr Crossman in another post (pure cowardice if you ask me), But I don't think they could measure up at all w/ a real kenpoist. In Mr. Grasshopper's other forum ,some students have tried to make the connection w/ Ed Parker's kenpo. I am not seeing it. Pure ripoff marketing IMHO. Come on down and prove yourselves. I know a certain number of you want to align w/ Ed Parker. As well I will happily indulge certain short master wannabes w/ parking lot challenges as well. (anyone remember Kelly Kot?) I will repost with tournament dates as they become available. Hope to see you! especially T.D.! No, I am NOT "STMDB" or "Ex-Student" I am Jeff Koloski."

Hello TKFBS, I don’t really care what was posted on the other forums I am responding to what you have posted on this forum. You posted, “…they have had decades to prove a point.” The students of, and associated with, Moh have a long history of competition. M. Hilbig talks of her experiences in her book. My teacher told me all about T. Higgs competing. Sifu Shawn competes, as does SwollenKnuc. Sifu Sblano posted about one of his students winning a competition. You posted, “After all you call the pathetic representations of forms KENPO 1,2 &3. Let's see what some REAl Kenpoists think of 'em? You talk of real Kenpo stylists…what version of American Kenpo would you be referring to? This quote is on the first line. “American Kenpo began with Ed Parker. But it is not a single system as Ed went through five transitions before arriving at what would be come the Ed Parker Style of American Kenpo.” That’s from here; http://www.americankenpo.com/dedication.html I happen to like the Moh versions of Awakening of the Dragon sections 1, 2, and 3. And there have been several students of Moh who have competed in forms. I was there when some have won. You posted, “I know the TKF stance has been to NOT compete in tournaments…” That is patently absurd as I have noted earlier. You posted, “In Mr. Grasshopper's other forum ,some students have tried to make the connection w/ Ed Parker's kenpo. I am not seeing it.” There have been similar allegations here. And in my opinion, there are some similarities. Regards, MrE2Me2 Without prejudice E&OE

-The students of, and associated with, Moh have a long history of competition. M. Hilbig talks of her experiences in her book. My teacher told me all about T. Higgs competing. Sifu Shawn competes, as does SwollenKnuc. Sifu Sblano posted about one of his students winning a competition.- Very true, They were all succesful AFTER leaving Simon. They had to grow and adapt and find the weakness in what they were taught. Hilbig does NOT teach the same curriculum as TKF. For that matter, I can say I have been to tournaments and won, I did train @ TKF for awhile, however I would not attributre any of my skill from TKF. I have been better trained since. All of those aforementioned folks had the ability to do what they wanted or was necessary to advance their style. The sheeple @ Temple never had that opportunity. "You talk of real Kenpo stylists…what version of American Kenpo would you be referring to?" Ed Parker's version would be the only valid comparison as that is what Simon claims to have been a part of. Why do you think there are several choices? "This quote is on the first line. American Kenpo began with Ed Parker. But it is not a single system as Ed went through five transitions before arriving at what would be come the Ed Parker Style of American Kenpo.” That’s from here; http://www.americankenpo.com/dedication.html " whatever. Didn't even want to read the the clipping and what you deciphered from it. Moh Kenpo -I hate that you call it that, cuz there really is no Kenpo it. Looks very little like any version of Ed Parker's Kenpo. "I happen to like the Moh versions of Awakening of the Dragon sections 1, 2, and 3. And there have been several students of Moh who have competed in forms. I was there when some have won" Where? Were there any Kenpo Notables there judging? I posted that I would like to see some real kenpoists have a look @ those forms not Local Yocal Tae Kwon Do guy judging forms. I was quite specific there. I know you desperately try to tie yourself Ed Parker as some form of validation. But as someone who has experience in both , You are stretching in the broadest sense . " And in my opinion, there are some similarities." And what is your opinion worth really? You have NOT trained both systems have ya? Haven't gone to any seminars or cross-trained? Don't stretch too far away from your armchair with your opinions. I calls 'em as I see 'em. J.K. " -

Hello TKFBS, You posted, “They were all succesful AFTER leaving Simon.” Actually, M. Hilbig and T. Higgs were successful while they were with S.K.S. Sifu Shawn was never a member of T.K.F. but he is a student of Moh. You posted, “They had to grow and adapt and find the weakness in what they were taught.” As Grand Master Ed Parker himself said, and I quote, “To live is to change, and to obtain perfection is to have changed often." That is from here (the last line at the bottom of the page). http://www.q-net.net.au/~razored/Ed%20Parker.htm You posted, “Ed Parker's version would be the only valid comparison as that is what Simon claims to have been a part of.” I’m not quite sure what you mean here; please elucidate. You posted about Grand Master Ed Parker’s system growth, “Why do you think there are several choices?” He found what he considered more efficient ways of doing things. ” Ed found that the traditional Kenpo system needed more modifications. Ultimately, his changes made up 85% of the system which he now call American Kenpo”. From here: http://www.psykenpology.org/lineage.htm You posted, “Moh Kenpo -I hate that you call it that, cuz there really is no Kenpo it.” I call it Moh Kempo which means fist law (in most translations I have ever read). And even Grand Master Ed Parker was uncomfortable with names. He even said, “Later on, he regretted using the term “karate…” This is from here: http://www.kenpomachine.com/rootsofepak.html You posted, “Looks very little like any version of Ed Parker's Kenpo.” Based on what I have seen there are many types of Kempo/Kenpo. I would agree that American Kenpo and Moh Kempo do look dissimilar. But then they both look different from other forms of Kempo, as well. You posted, “Where? Were there any Kenpo Notables there judging? I posted that I would like to see some real kenpoists have a look @ those forms not Local Yocal Tae Kwon Do guy judging forms. I was quite specific there.” My experiences have been local, true enough. But M. Hilbig was an instructor with S.K.S. when she competed in California. As for who was there, I didn’t look to find out. You posted, “I know you desperately try to tie yourself Ed Parker as some form of validation.” I “tie” myself to him as much as I reference myself to other like minded people. I have come to see that Grand Master Ed Parker had a great idea in using a “results driven perspective”. The last is from here: http://www.kenpomachine.com/rootsofepak.html You posted, “And what is your opinion worth really? You have NOT trained both systems have ya? Haven't gone to any seminars or cross-trained? Don't stretch too far away from your armchair with your opinions.” I have been training in various martial arts since childhood. And it would be nice to sit back in my arm chair (if I had the time) and point fingers. But I’m just too busy. You posted, “I calls 'em as I see 'em.” It has been my experience that we all do that, especially at this forum. Regards, MrE2Me2 Without prejudice E&OE

To MrE: Good response. Open minded and intelligent as always. To TKFBS: I have no wish to provoke you into further pointless confrontation on this website. Better to just ignore your inflammatory remarks. However before I do that, I would like to say that based on what I've read in your postings on this, that and the other websites, you seem to know very little about what Grandmaster Simon taught. Perhaps you spend a few months training at Temple Kungfu but you have little more than a rudimentary knowledge of that system. Irregardless, I encourage you to keep at it with the Ed Parker Kenpo. It might do you some good - if you can learn to open your mind. I am respectful of the teachers of that art, and all the other arts out there. I believe that anyone who devotes their life to teaching these arts in order to do something for the good of society, deserves respect. Please extend those who still train under Grandmaster Simon's system the same courtesy. We feel that what we have learned is worth passing on. RD

Hi All, Missed you TKFBS :wink: Sorry you don't like the name Moh Kempo. However, that is what it is. For clarification, there is no "other" forum that I am associated with as is mentioned above, just this one. Cheers

The Moh style contains most of the techniques that exist in other styles of Kung Fu. The real issue is how they are taught and if the student learns to adapt and use those techniques in ways that advance beyond what they saw in their teachers. I have learned hundreds of applications of open X stance that i would never have considered at TKF and don't think too many of the people who were training there would have considered either. I can teach those applications now, but then is it still "Moh kempo?" I think alot of the problem with martial arts in north america stems from the elitist attitudes of people. No art is better than the others. Some have advantages in certain areas but ultimately it is the person who trains the art that defines how useful it is. On that subject I wanted to give my two cents on the situation of Ed Parkers Kempo being changed to deal with the grappling craze. Rubbish. That is my response. A person doesn't need to change the art at all. They don't need to learn and teach grappling techniques. They simply have to train and do drill to deal with grappling scenarios using kempo's powerful striking. If you are a good striker BE a good striker. Don't dilute your ability by becoming a mediocre grappler or you will still lose to a skilled grappler. How many times have you lays on the ground beside a punching bag that was also laying on the ground just so you could work your punches from that position? If I asked a student to punch a heavy bag on their first day of training I wouldn't expect a very skilled or powerful strike because it isn't practiced and their body isn't conditioned to be good at it. Likewise if I ask anyone who is a good striker to do a strike from a position they don't train from (Like the ground) I would expect similarily crappy results. The muscles in the back and arms that you use for various punches have to be conditioned for the situation you are in. You may have an awesome punch from a left bow stance, but it's a totally different technique to do a punch while laying on your back. My senior student is a grappler as well and we have come to the conclusion that a grappler is out of his element when he takes a striker to the ground and the striker ignores the situation and just keeps on striking. You don't even need to get to your feet (unless there is multiple attackers) you just need to destroy the grappler with concise and practiced strikes. The real problem isn't the style, it is that the people who train the style do not cover all their bases. I urg everyone to spend a good deal of time on the ground working your strikes. Lay on your back with your head off the ground and chain punch into the air above you. You strengthen your neck muscles and also the muscles you need to be an effective ground striker. Practice walking across a room with elbow strikes (#4) into the ground. Left, right, left, each strike conditioning your elbows and forearms as well as every muscle used to do so. It makes you effective at smashing an opponant who is also on the ground. Ulike the UFC you do not have to confine yourself to head strikes. Elbow into his knees, ribs, groin, bladder. But be trained to be effective at what you know rather than just saying it doesn't work and trying to start over from scratch with a totally different style of fighting. Jujitsu and wrestling ultimately are not effective styles. They just caught the striking arts by surprise in the modern cross style fighting tournaments. (Which happen to all be 1 on 1 fights. Imagine what art would be popular if the UFC had decided to have 4 vs 4 fights instead.) Strikers have every tool they need to beat a grappler 100% of the time. They just need to sharpen those tools, not get new ones.