Does anyone have any " Fred Villari" clips?

I use that particular technique, or parts of it, a lot at full speed on a sparring partner that doesn't know what I'm going to do. The catching the hand with an down and outward parry/check and rebounding into a backhand strike (fist or open hand)to the side of a person's head is a very fast and effective technique. Especially when trying to close the gap from the outside. Grabbing their collar (or hair) and yanking them down to their knees (or stomach depending on their momentum) and following them down to finish with an ad-lib is also useful. I also use that first part against kicks coming at me.

I'm beginning to think that you are overly generalizing a bit from your own experience and disregarding the experience of others. We've all been in the "I'd never use this so why should I train it?" phase of our training, but we then go on to learn new things about it. Just when I think that a technique isn't worth much, my teacher or some other senior will come along and either show me why what I was doing was not effective, or how to tweak it to make it work right. That's when the lightbulbs come on and you start to re-think the rest of your material in that light to see if it too can be tweaked like that. It's also when you see that the old boys that came up with this stuff weren't just sitting around drinking coffee and playing an imaginary game, but rather deriving the techniques from their experiences.

I've been in quite a few fights, I used to bounce in bars and work concert security and still have to break up fights several times per year where I'm at. I found GJJ very useful to me but the same holds true with my Karate, Kempo and Kajukenbo training. I have preferences and feel that Kajukenbo is the best fit for me, but that doesn't mean there wasn't value in the other training I had. John Bishop and I talk about our mutual Shotokan experiences and agree that it was useful, but not for us ultimately. Same goes for one of John's black belts who had previously been with the USSD. We talked about what we liked and didn't and how we're both happy with where we're at now. Take the meat and leave the bones.

 

Gufval1981, I just found this on M/T by "Kosho" on a break down of #6 kata:

step
180 degrees and deliver a # open hand block and grab with your (L) hand the attackers
wrist. Holding on with your (L) hand you deliver a (R) cross hand shuto to the attackers
throat then pull 1/2 way back to elbow postion and then deliver a (R) hand open tigers mouth
strike to the attackers throat (holding the throat) you then deliver a (R) leg sweep take
down.

 

"Besides isn't this a thread about FV clips?"

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing when I posted but it seemed Mr. Villari's video clips of some of the SKK combinations led us down this path instead. Sh_t happens.... I wouldn't lose any sleep over it though, none of the rest of us are. - Joe

 

I like KempoFist's view on this. I am somewhat biased because I tossed out that other stuff a while ago. This discussion appears to be in several parts so here is my opinion.

You guys talk about all the different tools and how you learn a technique and that should give you a different tool. It isn't as if we are fixing a car or building a house. We are talking about destructive tools. If I go into a house to destroy it, I need a wrecking bar, a reciprocating saw, and a sledge. How many "tools" do you need to punch in someone's face? How many "tools" do you need to take someone to the ground? Etc. How many "tools" do police officers learn to take people down? I would rather have a few near perfect tools than hundreds of different ****** ones.

Another point is that it appears to me that what KempoFist is advocating is to QUESTION what you are doing and ask yourself the following questions:

Is this working for me?'
Is it working for the person who is teaching it to me?
If it is or isn't working for me, do I really need this technique?
Am I training in a method that improves my skillset, not my toolbelt?

An exercise for everyone: List 10 techniques that you would teach your student or your child to defend themselves.

I'll start.

Jab
Cross
Elbow
Knee
Double Leg Takedown
One good sacrifice throw
Side mount
Americana
Guard
Ezekiel Choke

 

Dan,
Will you please understand where I am coming from. Please do not school me in the amount of hits you have taken. I have taken much of the rough side of life myself. I am just mentioning where I believe it is best to learn and if others wish to go into sparring good for them.

You are not impressing me with your eggs cracked routine, of course you get hit, and get hurt. I am mentioning the way true teaching should be in my humble opinion, and not some egotist. Focus mitts are good and so is pads and some light sparring. But You have never been in the kind of situations I have been in (I'd bet big bucks on that Dan). I'd say you need to reevaluate your thoughts and save them for someone you think you are impressing.

Gary

 

You mean a straight jacket and a padded cell?

 

Joe, nice post. I see we're on the same page when it comes to good training. Although I still hold my issues with many techniques, I see the way you've utilized them despite how many other schools do and I can respect that. Unfortunately I have yet to find my article, but I have an excerpt from my Kempo Critique article that sums it up...

New Thread: http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=51947
Original Thread: http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=34416&highlight=puzzle

"1&2) Ideology over Reality: Fortunately for me I never fully encountered the concept of techniques not working, simply because I was never really taught them as full techniques intended to be done verbatim. Instead my instructor taught them using the analogy that I still use today, as a "puzzle." Each technique, contains numerous pieces that can be used in various situations. For example, in green stripe belt Kempo 2 you would parry the punch with a palm, then following up into the nose driving him backwards. You then wrap the outstretched arm and elbow to the kidney. Then you bring your arm around and choke the neck with a ridgehand, flowing into another choke moving around the body, then finishing with a downwards chop dropping the opponent down. Now all togethor this move is completely ridiculous, and anyone who's ever been in a real fight or even a hard sparring match will tell you. But when broken down into pieces, the initiation, the slipping of the body into a choke, all can be worked into more practical drills. By breaking the technique down, you are now left with practical pieces that can be utilized in various scenarios, which can be drilled at varying belt/skill levels."

Haven't we been through this before? "Alive" training does not mean you only spar, fight, and drill at the exclusion of other forms of conditioning. No where does it say that bagwork, drills or shadowboxing do not aid a fighters ability or overall game. However this does not validate impractical drills or techniques, as well as it does not validate one who does not train "live" but only trains in such a 'dead' manner.

There is also a difference between combos and techniques. Techniques have a beginning a middle and an end/finish. Combo's are used in sequence of an even bigger game plan, where they can possible end the fight but flow into the rest of the game with ease. A jab-cross-hook combo can injure an opponent or end a fight, and is used offensively to set other things up (on an unpredictable opponent) if the fight does not end. Combination 18 is used defensively and is reliant on a specific attack and unrealistic reaction of an opponent that ultimately ends the fight, not accounting for any unpredictable actions of the opponent. Very big difference.

 

Perfect!

Jab
Cross
Shovel Hook
Round Kick
Swinging bodyhug sweep
Guillotine choke from Guard
Mounted GnP
Side Mount GnP/Knees
Rear Naked Choke
Monkey Guard/Cover

 

And of my list, what was formally taught in Kempo? Jab, Cross, and Round kick. Although technically the jab and cross were byproducts of sparring trying to use "front two knuckle" and "back two knuckle" punches that were taught from chamber.

 

Ok Dan.

**********
Jim,

You mention:

Not sure if you learned it different, but I learned it as cupping the hand and CATCHING the punch as it comes at you, then stepping into a slap to the ear. Follow that up with a reverse grip to the back of the neck, drawing him down with a horse stance and then elbowing and hammer striking to the temple. You think THAT is useful?
**************

I can see where you are coming from here I believe. When you have slapped the ear and caused the person to fall as it is supposed to, and does in my experience, how are you going to continue???

Well maybe you need to look closer and break it down further and figure each of the moves are not something that is going to be completed. Maybe you need to think the back of the neck is one that if you are unable to get the slap in and then you grab the neck and continue, or you just do the elbow and strike by driving down hard while dropping into a horse stance at the same time to give a lot of power in your punch.

Or the same move using the hammer fist rather than the elbow. All are related to the same area and need to be broken down individually and observed from, a single hit, rather than being able to be in a cohesive fluid flow from start to finish.

If I am making myself clear? I am thinking, when does the defender become the attacker and in the court system it will go, I am sure.

For example stopping the fist from coming in the attacker quits for you have wrenched his wrist and broken it. He is done.
Now you stop the wrist (or have to parry) and miss the wrench (twist) so now you slap his ear. He falls. Or you miss and then the grab, or you miss now the elbow, or you can't use the elbow, so you hammer fist.

Hope that all helps my thoughts...

Gary

 

Gary perhaps I'm thinking where I try to catch the punch, but he doesn't behave like a good little uke leaving his arm out there, (or maybe, he's been BOXING for 400 years and has mastered this fatal move known as the....jab) thus leaving me grasping at nothing while he 1-2's my face with his cross and I don't slap anything?

 

Combinations are used by boxers, kick boxer, Thai Fighters etc. etc. ad infinitum. Techniques are isolated, combinations are not. I'm not sure where you got the idea that combinations were not used by these other groups of fighters.

Anything of a defensive nature is reliant upon a specific attack, or at least a specific range of attacks. Combo 18 is no different. It does not rely on the opponent being compliant or predictable unless one's training has been poor to the point of not being able to adapt to variations.

Again, I think you're coming from too limited of a perspective to say that these only work under very specific and predictable situations. Only the bad combinations are that limited.

 

Nuck Chorris: How many "tools" do you need to punch in someone's face?

Joe Shuras: Probably one, the rest are variations.

Actually, we are really not far apart in our viewpoints. You state: How many "tools" do police officers learn to take people down? As a police officer since 1977 and a defensive tactics instructor and I have also taught the instructor's course, so I feel I can answer your question with some authority.

Frist, cops, in general, don't like to train in defensive tactics, it's like a chore to them, trust me on this one. Yes, you have some that like it but we're in the minority. So, you have to keep things real simple because most won't practice what you teach them to develop any real outside skill level. They get what they get in the initial classes and the re-certification classes, every so often, maybe once a year, some longer. That's it. Some departments may vary but this is general speaking. Therefore, minimum number of techniques carefully selected so that they require a minimum amount of work and skill level. So, this isn't exactly comparing apples to apples but I see your point and I'll address it further.

Martial arts.....I can almost, not quite but almost put it in the same category but for different reasons. In other words, those that train want to train and want to be there, They are paying for the training unlike police who won't go unless they get paid or comp time for training. However, Professor Nick Cerio always told me that 20-30 techniques is all that is needed for any practical system. He said: "Show me more and I'll show you variations". I, myself, have a certain very limited core techniques (less than the 20-30) that I drill over and over again that are extremely practical and street proven and fit me to a tee, my strenghts and my body style, like a glove. Yes, I have others because I wish to be coordinated with speed, power and accuracy no matter what position I contort into during the unpredictable and variable situations of an all out what most call a 'street encounter'.

So why all 100's of techniques? I don't agree with that at all and I have had many heated debates over the years over this issue I call quantity vs. quality or a jack of all trades and master of none. I do feel we should have more techniques than are our own personal choice, our personal core movements, for a very important reason. We are teachers and one man's trash is another man's treasure. What fits me, my attributes, my body style may not fit you or someone else. Therefore, I believe in the menu concept. We all go out to lunch, let's say five of us, at the same restuarant, food prepared by the same cook but we choose what we want due to our own personal tastes, something off the menu. Some of us may choose the same meal, others different BUT regardless it is a meal that suits our personal flavor. As instructors, we should be able to offer our studetns of all gender, all shapes, sizes, body weights, all ages, a personal choice to fit them.

Another reason, which I tihnk a lot of systems do this for is simply a marketing ploy. Part of the commercialsim of the art, to keep the advanced students paying for lessons instead of working with them hone their skills further and to develop themselves into a style within themselves. - Just my personal prespective of these issues, take it or leave it, Joe

 

Nuck... "I've always said, it's not about how much you know, it's about what you can do."

Oh you know 20 different ways to deflect a punch and counter? You know 22 takedowns? You have 40 submissions in your repertoire? That's funny cause this high school wrestler here can take you down and pound your face in without breaking a sweat.

 

One doesn't need the uke to leave his punch hanging out there to make this work. It's just a quick parry and bounce into the back of hand strike to the jaw (not a slap to the ear). The same strike is used in FMA empty hands techniques all the time and is effective. The combo is not used against someone that is a classical boxer, but rather a brawler who likes to throw haymakers. (Thar do be more than one type of opponent out thar).

 

Where did I say they did not use combos? (and please do not confuse the concept of combos and "Kempo Combinations." Kempo combinations are techniques, not combos.

Yes, but when the attack is consistently unrealistic (half mooning forward lunge punch, flacid wrist/lapel/shoulder grab) then the technique will be consistently unrealistic. Unfortunately once you start dealing with realistic attacks it begins to look more like a sloppy kickboxing match than it does a Kempo stomping of doom, and that's just like....so much effort, and it delves into the concept of "SPORT" training, and we all know how ineffective that mentality is for the str33t.

I'm limited? I train regularly with people of more backgrounds than I knew existed. We try things out, we discuss things and share ideas. But one things certain is I know Kempo inside and out. I was of the staunchest defenders of it a few years back, and I think if you took my old self and put him on this thread against me now, you'd see some serious fireworks. Perhaps that's why I'm so adamant about the issue today.

 

I take it you know this guy.

 

I can see that, so you are going to have to do some thing else I figure.

Got to have the tools to do the job and that means quite a bit of knowledge and experience. The standing complying uke is for you to practice.

If you were able to observe the hit that was put on a uke in a Paul Mills video you can see some working and some not working. Over on San Jose Kenpo site it is in the AKKI thread.

Paul Mills video I am talking about is the perfect example of my dislike for striking a uke so hard, it is not needed, you should go over there and look at it. It is BS big time...

Regards,
Gary

 

Not personally. Just on here. But who knows, perhaps you know him too? Might be closer than you think

 

I'm basing my observastions on your comments. I'm not fantasizing about some theoretical fights. You are very young and got promoted young in a group I know about. It doesn't mean that you know Kempo inside and out. There are many many LEOs and others that value their Kempo/Kenpo training for a good reason: it works. No offense, but you don't know what you don't know.