Thanks for taking a look.

As far as standardization goes, I feel that it can be a good thing to some
degree, but not
at the quantity of material in this system. I also feel that there is a supply
of things that
don't fit, (I agree with the pinans), but I also think that we don't need to add
in kajukenbo.
I like kajukenbo as much as the next SKK fellow, but our forms remind you of the
palamas
sets because (as I know you know) they were based on the palamas sets. I feel
that would
be adding in a redundancy. I'm for leaner and meaner. It would be like
exchanging riding
on Kajukenbos coattails in the place of karate's coattails. There's a generation
of us out
here that want to bring back (or maybe establish) the reputation of SKK for
effectiveness
as opposed to the reputation we had that led to the saying that the meaning of
front
postion was to indicate that they were making money 'hand over fist'.

Thanks again, and I hope that as you dig into the site, you find it useful.

Matt



--- In shaolinkempo@yahoogroups.com, zorak_zoran <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> > Discussion: Does anyone object to someone providing
> > so much access to the material? I believe that the
> > style is what is taught to the student but the
> martial
> > art is what he/she makes of it, but does that mean
> > there should be unfettered access to those tools
> that
> > make your art?
> >
> > Tim
>
> I don't think it's bad to provide access to material,
> especially hard to find material. I believe doing
> things like this will help foster discussion and
> possibly a consensus on how things should be done.
>
> Over the years, I've noticed that different folks from
> the same style do things differently or understand
> things differently. At first, i thought that was cool
> but now I'm starting to think that it leads to
> fracturing or diluting of a style. Maybe that's
> inevitable.
>
> However, it would be nice to have some sort of
> standards that we can adhere to. Or at least some sort
> of minimal requirements. Maybe an independent board to
> help instructors keep up their quality.
>
> That being said, I'm the worst offender to my own
> standardization ideal. I've taken SKK and merged what
> I've learned of KGS (it's parent style) into it. Most
> of the old KGS material is Kajukenbo, so I added a
> little of that here and there to flesh out the "holes"
> in my material.
>
> I've also taken out things that just didn't fit from
> my perspective...the pinans. They weren't karate's
> pinans and they didn't fit with other techniques in
> kempo. They felt like a big band-aid to make it more
> karate like. IMHO, either do the real karate pinan
> katas or don't.
>
> Now the kajukenbo pinans/palamas/monkey dances are so
> much like the #kata katas that they scream to be
> requirements. Yet most SKKers don't know them. What do
> we do?
>
> From Matt's site (just a quick once over), I see some
> similarities and some differences. Mostly in the realm
> of kempos...which are by nature variants or
> adaptations. I'd like to sit down and go over it more
> thoroughly since it looks very impressive and helpful
> to any SKKer at any level.
>
> Sifu Bry
> "the rambler"
>