Control Manipulation

(recently posted on Facebook my Mr. Ron Chapel)

Let’s talk about the four distances of combat as defined by Ed Parker Sr. in His Encyclopedia, and how they relate to each other and exactly where “Control Manipulation” resides. I was taught by him that there are subcategories to all four of the ranges, with each range as you progressively get closer to you attacker, encompassing additional concepts and principles, but including all of the previous ones. Thus the fourth range contains all of the other ranges principles of combat, as well as those exclusive to the fourth range itself.

This somewhat counters the different stages of action perspective some have adopted because of a lack of information regarding the full scope of Ed Parker’s Range definitions. And, although it is true varying ranges can and will dictate the availability of various fighting tools at one's disposal, they do not dictate or restrict beyond simple physical limitations normally associated with human physical interaction.

Ed Parker Sr. defines the four ranges as 1; Out of Reach, 2; Within Reach, 3; Contact Penetration, and 4; Contact Manipulation. Each of these ranges, however, has extensive subcategory information that must be learned en route to a full, and advanced level understanding of the science as he taught. Ed Parker’s son is a master at this level and he teaches almost exclusively to show how an attacker can be controlled. However, don’t think for a moment that he can’t strike if he desires to. As he puts it, “Striking is the easy stuff. If you want to know how good you are, try defending yourself with no striking allowed.”

From a commercial or motion-based Kenpo perspective, “Control” could be seen as a subcategory of “Contact Manipulation.” Because most of this information is not included in Kenpo karate (the business end of his teachings), the subcategories become significantly important to the higher levels of the science of execution.

However, when the higher-level curriculum is studied exclusive of the commercial interpretations, the subcategories may actually exchange places with the more superficial and simplistic range explanations of his Encyclopedia (completed and published after his death by his son), and terms like “contact” really become more a subcategory of “control.”

As previously stated, the first range is simply defined by Ed Parker Sr. as “out of reach.” The first subcategory for “out of reach” is “Psychology of Confrontation Theory.” As you can see, the subcategory is where real knowledge and comprehensive understanding lies. Therefore if you study the motion level of Kenpo Karate, “out of reach” is how the first range is defined. At higher levels of interpretations, “Psychology of Confrontation Theory” must be learned to supplant the obvious “out of reach” descriptor.

This is important because the Psychology Of Confrontation defines the problem parameters from which you build your solutions in the form of the technique responses. As an example; Kenpo Karate suggests that all initial punches are “step-through,” however, in reality, a step-through punch is more likely to be a secondary assault over a primary one, if it exists at all on the street.

When examined from the P.O.C. mandate whether on the street or in a contest tournament, there is a reason why the lead hand is more prominent in an attack. Time. To “attack” someone with the hand weapon that is the farthest away from your victim/opponent takes more time and is therefore slower. Remember? Distance over time equals speed. D/T=S. In a contest, it is more likely to be after some other initial action offensively or defensively. Perhaps a back-fist followed by a reverse punch that still doesn’t “step through.”

Thus punching attacks that are of the initial “step-through” variety are unrealistic and suspect in training, but prevail in the commercial arena because they are easier to defend. So, a deeper dive into the subcategories exposes the flaw in the training scenario problem-solving matrix commonly used by most everyone, because that’s the way they came up through the ranks.

Mr. Parker said to me, “I’m going to throw a right punch at you, are you ready?” I nodded and he stepped forward with a straight right to my head and engaged my Startle Reflex survival mechanism. He reminded me of his saying, “Distance is your best friend.” He said, Ron, distance is not about distance, it’s really about speed. The more distance, the slower your attacker will be because Distance Over Time will give you his Speed. The more distance, the more time, the less Speed. This one simple lesson at Range One when examined under P.O.C. will force you to make significant changes to your training and bring it closer to reality and will force a re-examination of your blocking methodologies as well.

Unlike in demos and tournaments, on the street attackers like to work surreptitiously and/or by surprise. You do not have the luxury of step-through punches, so training for the “street” for punches you’re not likely to actually see, is counterproductive.

Another exclusive Fourth Range Subcategory Concepts is “Control Manipulation.” Although most are aware of “Control Manipulation,” its definition and its general function, most are unable to resolve its omitted relationship with the “four range” definitions, or its apparent contradictory descriptive similarity with “Contact Manipulation.”

But, This holds true for every range, where the conventional and simplistic is well known, versus the in-depth unknown. Ed Parker Sr. only published the simplistic versions of his range theory because his popular interpretation of Kenpo did not contain significant depth to warrant additional information he was not generally teaching or supporting in his commercial schools or students.

“Control Manipulation” as the other extreme at distance four, simplistically and somewhat erroneously is defined as “Contact Manipulation.” This is a category of “grappling” yet popular Kenpo does not address grappling or Control Manipulation in its codified curriculum in any form.

In reality, the only concept it addresses in any range is “contact manipulation” and it only hints at Control Manipulation through techniques where victims are seized, grabbed, hugged, choked, and tackled or attempted with no clear instruction as to how to deal physically with these type attacks, yet three-quarters of the system is some form of grappling.

Because of the lack of information, most teachers of that information have addressed these attacks as all being “attempts” rather than actually completed assaults as they should be. Lacking the knowledge to address extrication from a significant lock means you must move before you are seized. They have no choice absent additional information that was lacking from their teaching.

Thus you see the origin of the term I coined 30 years ago, “SubLevel Four Kenpo” which I used for a time to bring to light additional information available. It is a subcategory of my dominant American Chúan-Fa level of Kenpo that embraces all the concepts of all the sub-level ranges but draws its name from the fourth range because it is conceptually all-inclusive. I bastardized the term from Ed Parker who often said, “Let’s work on some of the subcategory stuff” just before he twisted me into a knot.

Thus you also see why “Control Manipulation” although defined by Ed Parker Sr., is not included in the simplistic version of his range theory. But by defining it he hinted at its existence, while not including the “how” of any of its execution in the curriculum most learned. Nowhere is the “how” of a wristlock, throw, pin, offensively or defensively, or any control concept addressed in any of his writing.

The truth is most of Mr. Parker’s instructors let him down. They were supposed to fill in the blanks, but business overwhelmed most and that material is not user friendly.

Here is how it was supposed to work. In the curriculum, Mr. Parker placed techniques like “Twisted Twig.” Most know it as a wristlock takedown/throw attack. The instructors looked in the manual and taught what was in the book, but never addressed the attack side of the equation instead choosing to ignore it because of its complexity, and after the initial first generation the knowledge wasn’t there anyway.

For those who suggest there’s no grappling or jiu-jitsu in Kenpo Karate, they would be wrong. It just wasn’t spelled out because teachers were supposed to do that. You can’t write grappling techniques, you have to teach them. Mr. Parker was telling them to, “examine and learn the attack.” By doing so the defenses will get better and be realistic. Instead the victim “hands” his hand to the attacker, and as soon as he touches it, he jerks his hand away and does the technique. That’s not training that’s fantasy training. A good teacher will train the wristlock until students can execute it well. Then you teach the defense and counters. That’s real training. Learning to defend against a real attack, so that you may survive. But as I said, that level of training that requires a lot of sore wrists and falling down is not user friendly and not the core market of Kenpo Karate.

There are a few who have addressed this side of Kenpo and its Chin-Na and I applaud them. I just wish there were more. In ancient times, there was Dave German, and now modern guys like Todd Durgan, Mohammad Tabatabai, Jeff Speakman, etc are doing good things.

In the Infinite Insight series Volume One physical categorical breakdown, all of the tenants of American Chúan-Fa and its SubLevel Four sub-components are addressed in the category simplistically labeled, “Other.” At its highest levels, it is addressed and becomes American Chúan-Fa (my term) at the Black Belt level.

So before someone puts a video of a guy stepping through sticking his hand out and then freezing so the "defender" can jump around in a choreographed dance, think about what you're doing and what it is supposed to be.