quote:

ORIGINAL: Zoran

I read a lot of other Kenpo forums. There is always arguments about history, traditional vs. progressive, who is the true heir, and other hoopla.

Even in Parker's American Kenpo, which at one time prided itself of being a progressive system, now argues about staying pure to SGM Parker's teachings and puts down those that have strayed away from the original system.

My question really is a simple one. Are any of these things important or relevant for that matter. The various Kenpo systems that came out of Hawaii were always focused on effective self defense. Reason being is Hawaii, at that time, was a rough place. The people that trained there were fighters. Not the kind that walked into a ring and took home a trophy or title, but real fighters that used their training to defend themselves against thugs (of course, some kenpoists where thugs themselves).

Have we lost that edge? Are we more concerned with history, principles of motion, or competition rather than keeping our feet firmly planted on the not so pretty world of reality? Are we more concerned with how a technique should be done instead of the practicle applications of a technique?

What do you think?