A bit about my eclectic style of kung fu--Wun Hop Kuen Do

**SifuJason** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 1:46pm

I figured as "noob" to these boards I would post some information about the style of Kung Fu I study/teach, since most people are unfamiliar with it. This is from my website:

Wun Hop Kuen Do Kung Fu, which means "combination fist art style", was founded by Sifu Al Dacascos in 1969. Wun Hop Kuen Do (WHKD) is a style of KAJUKENBO that incorporates Chinese and Filipino martial arts into the traditional KAJUKENBO system. KAJUKENBO is a composite system of martial arts that was formed between 1947-1949 by grandmasters from various forms of martial arts. Mr. P.Y.Y. Choo brought karate to the system (KA). Mr. Frank Ordonez brought Ju-Jitsu, while Mr. J. Holck contributed Judo (JU-JU-Jitsu). Professor Adriano D. Emperado, the only remaining founder of the system, contributed Kenpo (KEN), as well as the Filipino fighting arts. Professor C. Chang contributed the boxing (BO) aspects of the art, including both western boxing and Chinese boxing, more commonly called Kung Fu.
As a composite system, KAJUKENBO sought to adapt and combine martial arts styles to create an all-inclusive system that could be effective in any street scenario. Sifu Al Dacascos took this further, incorporating significantly more Kung Fu elements into the system, as well as additional Filipino knife and stick fighting (known as Kali, Arnis, or Escrima). He further modified the system by incorporating 25 unique fighting principles to help consolidate combat knowledge into a common language that can be discussed and referred to in class. Finally, Sifu Al Dacascos further emphasized practically in his style, resulting in a system that prides itself on being reliable and practical in real-life encounters.
WHKD is commonly referred to as a "system without a system". The art seeks to adapt to any situation and incorporate new techniques and methodologies as they are encountered by practitioners. Within this framework, the style still maintains it traditional roots in Kung Fu, teaching the "ways to preserve rather than destroy", and seeking to instill a respect for humankind and sense of calm that should be present in any true martial artist.
Instruction is based around a set of requirements: blocks, strikes, holds, locks, throws, combinations, setups, history, and fighting principles that are contained in a red binder affectionately referred to as the "Redbook". The Redbook contains the list of requirements needed for each rank in the system. Next to each listed requirement is a description of the technique, to aid the student in study outside of class, and a place where the instructor may "sign off' the technique--a form of evaluation used to determine whether the technique is performed by the student at a level suitable for testing. When all the requirements of a given rank are signed off, the student may test for the next belt. The ranking system in WHKD is: white, yellow, orange, purple, blue, green, brown, and degrees of black. Red belts, which signify assistant instructor, may also be given out under certain circumstances.

**Sam Browning** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 1:52pm

"He further modified the system by incorporating 25 unique fighting principles to help consolidate combat knowledge into a common language that can be discussed and referred to in class."

Okay, I'll bite, will you provide some examples so we may see if they are unique?

Incidently, most really good principles are found in multiple systems.

**SifuJason** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 2:02pm

What makes them unique isn't so much that they are completely revolutionary or never thought of, but rather that they were codified, given definitions and a written curriculum, and then taught explicitly from the beginning of a student's education, especially given that it was developed in the 60s.

An example of a couple of fighting principles are "critical distance line" and "bridging the gap." The critical distance line is the distance from an opponent at which they can hit you reliably. It is variable based on the two people fighting. In a fight, you want to "bridge the gap," close the distance between your critical distance line and your opponents, quickly, deliver a series of blows, etc, and then get out of their critical distance line before they can fully retaliate.

Thus critical distance line is essentially the range of your opponent, but with the caviat that it's adjusted for skill.

Similarly, bridging the gap is the concept that you must get inside your opponents range in order to hit them (assuming similar skill of course), and that you don't want to stay there longer than you need to.

Not revolutionary in itself, but when you can discuss methods to bridge the gap in a class, and everyone understands what you are saying because they have read/listened to these concepts before, teaching becomes a lot more efficient and valuable. That is the unique part.

**Ke?poFist** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 2:23pm

Oh come on now Jason, just admit it and say you do Ke?po ;)

Heh, j/k. Very informative post.

**SifuJason** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 2:31pm

LOL, actually WHKD has move a good ways from the Ke?po roots of Kajukenbo. It doesn't flow the same way or approach "problems" like Ke?po does.

**thaibox** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 2:42pm

Jason -

A quick question. Are there allowances built into such things as "critical distance line" and "bridging the gap" for multiple opponents? From my experience, a 1on1 street fight is a very rare occurance. Above you did specifically mention two people fighting.

Thanks!

**Teh El Macho** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 3:04pm

A multiple opponent scenario is a rather lose-or-lose situation, and I don't believe any martial art out there has a reliable, realistic answer for it.

**SifuJason** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 3:13pm

Actually, as a street art, WHKD spends a lot of time on multi-man. For your black belt, you have to spar 10 on 1 (other people are mid-to low belts) at heavy contact. Crippling strikes are simulated of course (a kick near the knee results in the person acting as if their knee ligaments are broken, etc), but beyond that, it's as realistic as you can get.

If you can't take out your opponents, you don't get your belt.

Consequently, critical distance line and bridging the gap are taught as universal concepts, with direct applications to multi-man. In a multi-man situation, one must consider the critical distance line of all your opponents at once, and bridging the gap involves a lot of "mental calculus" to determine which paths provide the minimum "total gap" that must be bridge in order to strike an opponent--ie which way will put me in the least line of fire.

**thaibox** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 3:30pm

Jason -

Thanks for the info. You are very correct in refering to it as "mental calculus". If I ever make it to your part of the woods, I would enjoy dropping in an observing for a bit.

**thaibox** · Posted On: 2/23/2007 3:37pm

Originally Posted by El Macho

A multiple opponent scenario is a rather lose-or-lose situation, and I don't believe any martial art out there has a reliable, realistic answer for it.

You are very correct. I wasn't looking to see if they had solved the puzzle of multiple opponent, but more asking if they took into consideration teaching the differences to students as they grow in training.

I am always amazed at how many people never learn that what may work on one guy, might get you slaughtered by two.