Ron Chapel

When I was in Los Angeles on my way to Graham Lelliott's camp I was able to look up my old friend, Ron Chapel. Many of you know him as Doc.
   He was gracious enough to take some time out from work for lunch and met us (myself and Aussie Jack Nilon). We spent hours talking. Long enough that the waitress asked if we now wanted to order dinner!
  Ron is a fascinating man to talk with and we covered a range of subjects besides kenpo (and its politics). We talked about how the mind works, body mechanics, and who makes a good handgun. Motion Kenpo came up. Below I've passed on an article he wrote about the term a few weeks before I recently met with him. As he points out in it, I and some others don't take any offense to the term while others get pretty upset about it. I'll have him explain.

You use the term Motion Kenpo a lot, why?

Yes, many do, but like myself, only in mixed company. Most describe the Kenpo they do or teach as "based on motion," so I don't get the fuss. In all fairness it should be pointed out that I got the term "motion-Kenpo" from Ed Parker Sr. directly. The term is not a negative, only an apt description of the vehicle as is the term "commercial." Although not everyone teaches motion-kenpo commercially, that system is designed and built around a business model specifically for the purpose of commercial proliferation. Therefore both terms are correct. Among my own students it's just "Kenpo." But like any other discipline, when you mix company distinctions must be drawn to establish and understanding and to communicate. If I don't make that delineation many will presume I think and do as they were taught, and I do not.


There are others outside my lineage who utilize the term as well. I should also point out it is not a matter of "SL-Kenpo versus everything else." That would be incorrect. There are many who pre-date the creation of the motion model kenpo who also make a distinction in their interpretations. Many old the Old School Kenpo Students from when Mr. Parker first set up shop in Southern California, also either left before its creation or continued without adopting the motion based kenpo business concept, so I'm in very good company.



It is not unusual for those with one perspective to be protective of the point of view that is the totality of their understanding, and supports their knowledge, rank, and status investment. Moton-kenpo is "A" version of Kenpo not "the" only version of kenpo. However, I also recognize and have always said that the level of significance of motion/commercial kenpo is predicated in totality on the quality of the teacher, and as such there are individuals that do an exemplary job with what is by design limited material by continuing to educate themselves beyond its limited parameters to the benefit of their students, as Mr. Parker wanted.

Motion based kenpo is neither good or bad in and of itself. It is, what it is. Like many entities it has great potential, but that is no guarantee that teachers or students will fill that potential. Human nature being what it is, and adding business considerations to the process would suggest that most would fall short. Mr. Parker designed the material to allow everyone to seek their own level of competence within the boundaries of the teacher. Most who have visited or taken a class with me don't seem to have a problem with the distinction I and others make, which is quite easily demonstrable, and the truly gifted and intelligent teachers like a Steve LaBounty, Bob White, Lee Wedlake, etc seem to know and do well no matter what its called. Imagine that.
 
Those of you who know me and have taken classes or seminars know it's the expansion on the base that makes Parker kenpoa deep system. It takes a good teacher to do that. I'll take Doc's compliment, especially since I'm in good company with Mr. White and Sigung LaBounty. Next time I get out to LA, and I hope it won't be another almost 20 years, I plan to see what he's got for our law enforcement people. Should be interesting.