*NEW* Moh Kempo Lineage Tree

Hi, everyone! First off, congratulations, Grasshopper! Best wishes to your whole family. There are lots of good points in everyone's posts. I understand Grasshopper's criteria for this tree -- those who teach and promote the art. I also agree with RD -- there are many students who have done more to teach and promote the system than many of the instructors have, and I am not only referring to 3rd degree black belts or higher, but to many 1st degree black belts and even many experienced brown belts. That's where it starts to get fuzzy. Many of the instructors and masters on that lineage tree have moved on to other careers and no longer teach or promote the art. Some probably aren't even alive anymore, but yes, all of them have taught the art at some point in time. As far as promoting it, RD is right, some did way more to damage its reputation and reduce its growth than to promote it. On the other hand, however, many senior students have inspired, worked with, and taught younger students (and instructors) for years, still do it, and will keep doing it for many more. They don't do it in an official capacity as an instructor, but because that's what this system is about -- helping those who are on the same journey we are on. Sometimes they are asked to help teach by the "official" instructors, sometimes they are asked by a student who needs help, and sometimes they take initiative because they see where they can help. They do it because they love the art and want to help others grow in it. Some have taught dozens, even hundreds of hours, and that's not counting just working with their partners in class. There have been many exceptional teachers among instructors, and there have been many mediocre and poor ones. There have also been (and still are) many exceptional teachers among students, and there have also been many poor ones. There have been many instructors and students who promoted the art, and many who did a lot to bring it down. I guess the point RD is trying to make is that some long-time students did and do more to teach and promote Moh than some official instructors on the list, many of whom have not stayed with the system nearly as long and have moved on to other things. The lineage tree also doesn't quite work the way we wish it worked. It's not quite as clear-cut as who begot whom in Genesis. Most people who have trained for any length of time have probably studied under half a dozen chiefs, a couple of dozens junior instructors, and who knows how many senior students. Often students (be they instructors or students) have surpassed their teachers. Maybe MrE2Me2 has a point, maybe there is a need for more lists (as if there wasn't enough trouble with this one!). A list of those who have achieved a high level of skill and understanding of the style, including masters and black belts of all degrees, whether they teach/taught or not; a list of those who teach the art currently, for those looking to train it; a list acknowledging those who have taught in the past -- but that gets back into the same argument about who contributed more; a list of those who wish to share their stories of all the things they've achieved through their training, whether lengthy or brief, and how they've grown through it as a person. For all it is worth, I think it is a noble effort to try and bring the extended Moh family together and provide a forum for all interested former, present, and future practitioners of the style to interact and share their thoughts and experiences. I also appreciate the effort grasshopper and many others are making in trying to reconstruct and document the history and propagation of the style. However incomplete and controversial it may be at this point, it's a start, and I am sure it will evolve, as all things do. The five individuals mentioned by Swanstrom, do belong on the tree though. They do teach (or co-teach) every time they are in by virtue of being the highest or second highest ranking members in their cities. And even if they didn't, they should still be acknowledged as masters or master-candidates who have received their rank from GMS. Regardless of whether they taught or teach at the moment or not, those who have achieved the recognition as a master belong on that list if it is to be complete. And it is also virtually impossible for somone at that level not to teach, promote, and influence the direction of the art, even if they don't do it full time. One more thing, actually a small correction to Swanstrom's post: Master Abossein received his degree not last year, but two years ago, in 2005. Time flies when you are having fun! No sooner you get comfortable with writing 2006 for the date, it's 2007 already! :-) Train long and Prosper!

I do not know all the names Swanstrom mentioned, however Mr. Basinet for certain belongs on the tree. Before I was an instructor I recieved several lessons from this man and his understanding of the art as well as his skill at it are huge. I had heard that he and Mr. Maxwell both played a hand in helping start up the first Eastern Canadian schools. I don't have very accurate facts on that but suffice it to say Mr. Basinet DID teach students frequently within the studio. He had a blue sash years before some of the people on the list even began training. Who would you connect him to though? Master piercey? I think he likely trained with a good 4-5 masters or more in his time. Perhaps a direct link to O.E. Simon would be most appropriate? This list is extremely complicated because each branch requires research and cooperation. I have been driving myself nuts trying to remember Mr. Smith's first name. He was the Chief of Edmonton for some time until Mr. Hanly came. I was hoping to be able to message grasshopper and fix up that one little ?.Smith, but I don't think i ever knew his first name. If anyone DID know his name it could be Mr. Swanstrom, he logged alot of hours training with Mr. Smith and would more likely have heard his first name. Mr. Basinet or Mr. Maxwell would be others who might have this info. To my knowledge he is now a police officer with the Calgary city police. I don't think he teaches any longer.

To all, You (all) should know that Grasshopper is going to be a few days returning here. So if things seem to not be moving, please be patient. Regarding this forum and the Tree in general: To get to polite discourse has been a hard path. Yet we have come a long way! It has taken us since the end of June, 2006 (over eight months). 92, we can agree on the following points that you have posted. 1. “There are lots of good points in everyone's posts.” 2. “There have been many exceptional teachers among instructors…” 3. “…there are many students who have done more to teach and promote the system…” 4. “That's where it starts to get fuzzy.” 5. “There have been many instructors and students who promoted the art.” 6. “The lineage tree also doesn't quite work the way we wish it worked.” 7. “…maybe there is a need for more lists…” 8. “I think it is a noble effort to try and bring the extended Moh family together…” 9. “…it's a start, and I am sure it will evolve…” 10. “The five individuals mentioned by Swanstrom, do belong on the tree though.” 92, you posted, “…a list of those who wish to share their stories of all the things they've achieved through their training” Another excellent idea! It’s one that I regard as separate from the history of Moh (even though they are intertwined). 92, finally, you posted, “Master Abossein received his degree not last year, but two years ago, in 2005.” Noted ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hello North, Among other things, you posted, “…Mr. Basinet for certain belongs on the tree.” We’ll make a note of it. You also posted, “This list is extremely complicated because each branch requires research and cooperation.” I personally, believe that these things will only come about if we all continue to contribute. Regards, MrE2Me2 Without prejudice E&OE

Hello, North, His name is Mark Smith, although he changed his last name from Smith to Atkin since then. You are right, he is a police officer in Calgary now, as I believe is (or at least was) also Mr. Wilkinson. Smith is not training with the former TKF group, but he is in contact with some senior members from time to time, and from what I've heard, has been involved in training other police officers. He is the one who received the Canadian Professional Police Association's 2006 Excellence Award for interrupting an armed robbery in progress and disarming and subduing the crazed perpetrator who attacked him with several knives, one of them 12" long. http://www.cppa-acpp.ca/files/honours_awards/aoe/2006/AE_Booklet_06_Final.pdf#mark_atkin The first studio out East was opened and run by T. Demetrius, who had to live out of the studio for almost a year because he was unable to afford a place for what he was paid, and when he transferred back to Edmonton, he had his pay and seniority cut by the master in charge. Amazingly, this man is still around and has phenomenal skill. Mr. Bazinet and Mr. Maxwell were not involved in Ontario schools. Master Bazinet has been training for over 25 years now, and has been the most senior member in Edmonton for many, many years, leading or co-teaching all classes every time he comes in.

Hello, i remember Mr. Smith, Awesome guy ,talented taught my great techniques,wow sparring with him was great.Great hand. hope everthing is good with him!!

He was a black belt , along with mr. fuller, bouchard

Aren't we all teachers after all. Aren't we all students after all. If you are trying to say that teaching full-time some how makes you a superior then you are getting off base. Everyone here has seen full-time instructors that were less than inspiring in ability. It's not the being full-time that earns you anything extra other than a bit more repetitions, but as it works out often it isn't always that much more. You guys started off with a black belt list then when you realized there were a lot of black belts there were not deserving moved on to this instructors list. I'm not sure if that was in effort to make the list more credible but instructors full or part-time are no more or less credible than students. Mr Swanstrom made a very good point that I'm not sure was picked up by many so I'd like to re-state it in my own word. Among others there are two important elements in training that should not be confused, one practise and two experience through time. Being a full-time instructor provides a lot of practise and that will help you learn the basics quickly. Being an instructor does nothing to help with experience with time. That only comes through...you guessed it, time. Lots of practise will make you a very good blue belt, but it will not in of it's own make you a black belt. A black belt takes you a level of understanding that takes more than knowing the motions.

Oh and I almost forgot congratulations to Grasshopper and Mrs. Hopper.

Hello Current Student, You posted, “Aren't we all teachers after all. Aren't we all students after all.” Yes, as a teacher I usually will learn a great deal while teaching. You posted, “If you are trying to say that teaching full-time some how makes you a superior then you are getting off base.” I don’t recall anyone saying that. You posted, “You guys started off with a black belt list then when you realized there were a lot of black belts there were not deserving moved on to this instructors list.” I think that we can agree that the black belt list is certainly open to controversy. And so is the instructors list and the best way to resolve controversy is with the truth (in my opinion). As for the instructors list…a lineage tree is perhaps a more accurate description here. Perhaps SwollenKnuc defined a lineage tree best: “…a lineage tree is a list of individuals who have taught and promoted the art of Moh.” It has been proposed that several lists be compiled. We already have an Incomplete Black Belt List and an Incomplete Lineage Tree. Why not more? Swanstrom and yourself made comments concerning “practice” and “experience through time”. These are quite accurate, in my opinion. We should take those concepts and put them to paper concerning the history of Moh (in my opinion). They bolster the idea of identifying who is who and what they did. Writing down the history of Moh in several ways (via lists and histories) is likely to promote its growth. Conversely, not recording what we did or when we did it will inhibit our growth (in my opinion). Just look at those systems of martial arts that are growing. Look at the paper trail they leave. M. Hilbig and Olaf Simon were the first martial arts masters in Alberta to teach professionally. This is a widely known fact. I think we should continue this idea on paper with lists, histories and the like. Regards, MrE2Me2 Without prejudice E&OE

View Full Version: *NEW* Moh Kempo Lineage Tree

View Full Version: NEW Moh Kempo Lineage Tree