# Brother art?



## Kenpodoc

> Ed Parkers creation, Kenpo-Karate, has a brother and a sister art. The sister is Jeet Kune Do (JKD). Well save the brother for another day. Kenpo-Karate and JKD are both training concepts, as opposed to styles, or even real systems of the martial arts. Although the Bruce Lee vehicle unlike the Ed Parker version was never designed to be commercial, Ed Parker had a considerable influenced in its creation and concept.


Doc, I came across this in a 2002 post of yours. You may have discussed the brother but I haven't found it. Would you please expound on the Brother art.

Jeff    :asian:


----------



## Doc

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> Doc, I came across this in a 2002 post of yours. You may have discussed the brother but I haven't found it. Would you please expound on the Brother art.
> 
> Jeff    :asian:


No sir, I had never discussed this before because no one ever asked. Figures it would be you. 

Ed Parker's Kenpo Business Model shares a strong similarity to the Commercial Kung-fu, "San Soo." The basic structure was the same. Based on elaboarte self-defense techniques while wearing Japanese uniforms and belt rankings, it 'looks' the same. But under the skin the business model was also the same in recruitment, business structure, student retention techniqes, student manuals, etc.

The most obvious difference upon observation is the techniques are practiced at a much slower pace. Faster than Taiji but slower tan commercial Kenpo. The attacker mirrors this pacing as well as the defender, and all of the reactions to the strikes, which are also taught, also mirror this unusual rhythm between attacker and defender.


----------



## Kenpodoc

Thanks.  I was playing with the Freestyle techniques and thinking that they felt like the choreography in a Bruce Lee Movie. Subsequently I came across your statement above.  The relationship to SanSoo makes sense.

respectfully,

Jeff


----------



## Doc

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> Thanks.  I was playing with the Freestyle techniques and thinking that they felt like the choreography in a Bruce Lee Movie. Subsequently I came across your statement above.  The relationship to SanSoo makes sense.
> 
> respectfully,
> 
> Jeff


Quiet isn't it sir?


----------



## Toasty

Doc said:
			
		

> No sir, I had never discussed this before because no one ever asked. Figures it would be you.
> 
> Ed Parker's Kenpo Business Model shares a strong similarity to the Commercial Kung-fu, "San Soo." The basic structure was the same. Based on elaboarte self-defense techniques while wearing Japanese uniforms and belt rankings, it 'looks' the same. But under the skin the business model was also the same in recruitment, business structure, student retention techniqes, student manuals, etc.
> 
> The most obvious difference upon observation is the techniques are practiced at a much slower pace. Faster than Taiji but slower tan commercial Kenpo. The attacker mirrors this pacing as well as the defender, and all of the reactions to the strikes, which are also taught, also mirror this unusual rhythm between attacker and defender.


 
Hiya Doc,

What do you mean by "slower pace"? 
I did not get that impression at all. Sure when first learning the technique(s) - they are done at a slower pace - but so was my Kenpo training. Speed & power in both attacks & defenses came after the student has a firm grasp of the movement(s).


----------



## Kenpodoc

Doc said:
			
		

> Quiet isn't it sir?


sure is.

Jeff


----------



## JamesB

After doing a bit of surfing it seems that Mr Parker interacted to some degree with the 'san soo crowd', and that the originator of the san soo system in the states was a man called Jimmy H Woo. Is this the same Jimmy Woo that was an associate of Mr Parker (who taught for him at some time?)... if this is the case that would then contribute to some similarities between the two systems (AK and San Soo)?


----------



## Toasty

JamesB said:
			
		

> After doing a bit of surfing it seems that Mr Parker interacted to some degree with the 'san soo crowd', and that the originator of the san soo system in the states was a man called Jimmy H Woo. Is this the same Jimmy Woo that was an associate of Mr Parker (who taught for him at some time?)... if this is the case that would then contribute to some similarities between the two systems (AK and San Soo)?


 
2 Different Jimmy Woo's...believe it or not!  LOL


----------



## Doc

JamesB said:
			
		

> After doing a bit of surfing it seems that Mr Parker interacted to some degree with the 'san soo crowd', and that the originator of the san soo system in the states was a man called Jimmy H Woo. Is this the same Jimmy Woo that was an associate of Mr Parker (who taught for him at some time?)... if this is the case that would then contribute to some similarities between the two systems (AK and San Soo)?


No sir, they are two different people. James H. Woo, and James W. Woo. To avoid confusion, James W. was mostly referred to as "Jimmy Woo." Nevertheless, Ed Parker did, interact and influence James H. in creating the business of "Commercial Kung-fu." The only system to successfully make that leap on a reasoable large scale. The "W" in James Woo's name stands for "Wing" for James Wing Woo.


----------



## Doc

Toasty said:
			
		

> Hiya Doc,
> 
> What do you mean by "slower pace"?
> I did not get that impression at all. Sure when first learning the technique(s) - they are done at a slower pace - but so was my Kenpo training. Speed & power in both attacks & defenses came after the student has a firm grasp of the movement(s).


Perhaps that is your experience sir, and I respect your perspective. However traditionally San Soo classes were intentionally created and designed to function in this mid range speed to specifically position and separate the art from traditional Taiji, and function much closer to Taijiquan in application, according to Messrs. H. Woo and E. Parker.

I know of Kenpo Karate schools who do not engage in any physical contact, however clearly the sysytem is not designed to function in this manner.


----------



## PBMaster

Hello Doc and others.  I just wanted to respond to San Soo as a brother art to Ed Parker's Kenpo.  Maybe this will add clarification from my POV.
I have been in San Soo for 33 years and have taught it for 30  About the only thing similarity between the two styles of KFSS and Ed Parker Kenpo is their Chinese roots, mannerisms and that both men resided for a time in Hawaii.  Ed Parker frequently spoke with Grand Master Jimmy H. Woo and for a time Jimmy shared Ideas with him.  Maybe Ed with Jimmy H. Woo.  The method of training is very chinese and not unusual for a choy lay fut similar art, but there, in my view is where the similarity ends.  Kenpo is far more linear and has a different balance and feel.  It is also more patterned.  It's emphasis on faster hand movement.  When I read Ed Parker's Book I was surprised that many of my personal teachings on stances and usage were remarkably the same.  I suspect that I am far more circular, however.

I invite any and all to visit if you are curious as to our content and "style".  I can be reached at kfss@sansooreseda.com.  My 
site has some clips for viewing.  www.sansooreseda.com/videos.html

Master Paul Borisoff


----------



## PBMaster

After reading the thread and reading a little more between the lines, I must say that Jimmy H. Woo, (chin sui dek) was of a different era (than Ed Parker) He had more in common with ark huey wong, his contemporary. I can't comment on the relationship that Jimmy H. Woo had with Ed Parker, but people longer than my 32 years in the art, know nothing of it.

Perhaps the commercialism you are speaking of is with ill-fated business associate, Frank Woolsey. Jimmy had no manuals till very late in his teachings. He discouraged courses and published lessons. There were some personal notes of several students that made their way around and late in his teachings he sold 5 books of lessons and forms to his instructors to try to bring uniformity. They were only available to blackbelt and above. Commercial books were a no, no. Sudden Violence being one of the first. 

More on Frank Woolsey. In the early 70s, a franchised school under Frank Woolsey, adopted a highly commercial model with a manual. The practice was repugnant to Jimmy H. Woo and he split with Frank. The manual was one of the issues that led to the business split.

When I asked Jimmy about advertising in the yellow pages and other campaigns he told me to save my money. So I suspect that the idea of being commercialized comes squarely from the Woolsey dealings. There was a lot of money to be made in the early 70's and Frank made it. By the way, Jimmy rarely visited affiliate schools, and taught vast and rich art in a way that a large number of americans appreciated. There were no Kung Fu Uniforms in the early 70s, so he used the heavy Judo Gi at first and then sold his associate teachers light to medium weight karate gis. We are to an extent a throwing art, and other uniform types just did not hold up. There was no testing regimen, The belt represented the class of lesson, mastered and took a rather lengthy time to achieve. In 1976 the highest rank was 2nd degree black. As our "association" asserted itself belt began to be given out faster. In 1976, a second degree was a big deal.

Jimmy made money at a time when kung fu made money. He kept control of his group in a way that benefited them and himself. He showed lots of great stuff and held the respect of his american students for over 30 years.

I have personally taught many students who have emerged from american kenpo and never have felt that they were similar in the least. Kuk sul is closer.

And so Doc et al, I have been as close to this system as many. There has never been "business plan". If anything the structure was "loose".

It is a management style suited for a vast art and the american mind. There has been no tournements, no testing, no required association, no contracts. And I believe, no contact with Ed Parker for over 30 years.

Certainly there are other San Soo Instructors who were closer and with Jimmy H. Woo longer. I don't think they will have a different view.

Jimmy did not contrast arts. He found it best to do his thing his way and do his best.

Finally, Grandmaster Jimmy H. Woo's business plan was a sign in book, 35 bucks a month and a big heart and big smile.  He was the real thing and we miss him. In this day and age, big hearts and big smiles don't count for much. His passing was the end of an era. What you see now in his wake is a mixed bag.

A lot of good and yes in some, more commercialism.

Master Paul H. Borisoff


----------



## Hand Sword

Welcome PBMaster! It's an honor to have you here, and hear from one who truly knows the system. Please keep sharing sir!


----------



## PBMaster

You are welcome!

Hope that I can shed some light on San Soo. I have little knowledge of the Kenpo System.

Regarding speed...

It is natural to view things from our own circumstances.  San Soo is not a departure from traditional choy lay fut, because it is not, choy lay fut, per se. It is Jimmy H. Woo's Family art. The art is slow because the technique, properly performed is extremely dangerous.  As such, carelessness can not be tolerated or condoned. Portions of the human body only take so much and move so fast.  To go faster, certain traps and type of movements must be eliminated. However, it would no longer be combat.  A miscalculation or resistance to a movement leads to certain injury.

Several years ago a misdirected leg trap, caused by the upper body movement of the partner, imparted spiral breaks in both tibia and fibia. A total of seven fractures. $20,000 and a rod down the tibia, he was repaired.

And so Jimmy H. Woo kept it tamer in the end. This to avoid injury, law suits. 

I am a violinist and I approach instruction as a violinist approaches music. In a sense, the instrument we learn to play is our own body.  Foundation and technique, accuracy and integrity are most important.  Speed develops, but the potential for injury exponentially increases.

In addition San Soo is a circular art and cutting tighter circles make fast linear motion less necessary.

The linear motion more typical of karate arts is more circular due to a closer in-fighting preference.

In principal kenpo and san soo must share similarities. Fighting being fighting and human bodies being similar.  Chinese root.

Hope this helps.

Paul H. Borisoff, Master, KFSS


----------



## Hand Sword

Yes!

I have had very limited exposure to San Soo in the past, but, I would definitely say that there is nothing "commercial" about it. It was truly Fighting, in the strictist sense.


----------



## PBMaster

Martial Arts were designed, on one level, to do damage.  As such we must handle them as we would our finest and best weapons.  Art raises the mundane and primitive to a truly human level.  One of the differences of man and beast.

Anything worth doing is worth doing well and in keeping with what it is designed to do.  And it is worth mentioning that all our respective martial studies are termed "art".  We should all strive to keep our hearts pure and our pursuits honorable.

Jimmy H. Woo was a good example.  He was a gracious man.  A powerful man.  A charismatic personality.  As such a born leader and teacher.
He lived in a time, when, in his youth, fighting was a necessary skill and he lived to tell of it.

I have my views on things San Soo.  You might look over my comments at http://www.sansooreseda.com/masters.html


Thanks for your kind thoughts.

Master Paul Borisoff


----------



## Hand Sword

Very well said Sir!  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Thanks for the link.


----------



## Jonathan Randall

Thanks for the information, Mr. Borisoff, and Welcome to Martial Talk. It is great to have you here and I appreciate the knowledge and experience you bring. :asian:


----------



## green meanie

Thanks for the info. :asian:


----------



## Doc

PBMaster said:
			
		

> After reading the thread and reading a little more between the lines, I must say that Jimmy H. Woo, (chin sui dek) was of a different era (than Ed Parker) He had more in common with ark huey wong, his contemporary. I can't comment on the relationship that Jimmy H. Woo had with Ed Parker, but people longer than my 32 years in the art, know nothing of it.
> 
> Perhaps the commercialism you are speaking of is with ill-fated business associate, Frank Woolsey. Jimmy had no manuals till very late in his teachings. He discouraged courses and published lessons. There were some personal notes of several students that made their way around and late in his teachings he sold 5 books of lessons and forms to his instructors to try to bring uniformity. They were only available to blackbelt and above. Commercial books were a no, no. Sudden Violence being one of the first.
> 
> More on Frank Woolsey. In the early 70s, a franchised school under Frank Woolsey, adopted a highly commercial model with a manual. The practice was repugnant to Jimmy H. Woo and he split with Frank. The manual was one of the issues that led to the business split.
> 
> When I asked Jimmy about advertising in the yellow pages and other campaigns he told me to save my money. So I suspect that the idea of being commercialized comes squarely from the Woolsey dealings. There was a lot of money to be made in the early 70's and Frank made it. By the way, Jimmy rarely visited affiliate schools, and taught vast and rich art in a way that a large number of americans appreciated. There were no Kung Fu Uniforms in the early 70s, so he used the heavy Judo Gi at first and then sold his associate teachers light to medium weight karate gis. We are to an extent a throwing art, and other uniform types just did not hold up. There was no testing regimen, The belt represented the class of lesson, mastered and took a rather lengthy time to achieve. In 1976 the highest rank was 2nd degree black. As our "association" asserted itself belt began to be given out faster. In 1976, a second degree was a big deal.
> 
> Jimmy made money at a time when kung fu made money. He kept control of his group in a way that benefited them and himself. He showed lots of great stuff and held the respect of his american students for over 30 years.
> 
> I have personally taught many students who have emerged from american kenpo and never have felt that they were similar in the least. Kuk sul is closer.
> 
> And so Doc et al, I have been as close to this system as many. There has never been "business plan". If anything the structure was "loose".
> 
> It is a management style suited for a vast art and the american mind. There has been no tournements, no testing, no required association, no contracts. And I believe, no contact with Ed Parker for over 30 years.
> 
> Certainly there are other San Soo Instructors who were closer and with Jimmy H. Woo longer. I don't think they will have a different view.
> 
> Jimmy did not contrast arts. He found it best to do his thing his way and do his best.
> 
> Finally, Grandmaster Jimmy H. Woo's business plan was a sign in book, 35 bucks a month and a big heart and big smile.  He was the real thing and we miss him. In this day and age, big hearts and big smiles don't count for much. His passing was the end of an era. What you see now in his wake is a mixed bag.
> 
> A lot of good and yes in some, more commercialism.
> 
> Master Paul H. Borisoff


Your comments are well taken sir, and I met Frank many years ago. Nevertheless, although I am not nor have ever been a San Soo student, your videos validate my position on the 'speed' issue. My other comments were a reiteration from both Mr. Woo and Mr. Parker whom I also happen to have known. Mr. Woo's prescense at Ark Wong's Kwoon was indeed a normal occurrance along with James W. Woo as well. "Tiny' Lefiti was also involved in those discussions with James Woo as well as Dan Inosanto, but it was Mr. Parker who influenced almost everyone's business plan. His hand print is on almost all who are in the studio business of selling an art to men, women, and children. Thank you for your participation.


----------



## HKphooey

Master Paul Borisoff, 

Thanks for the great info.


----------



## PBMaster

Thank you for your response, Doc. I have not been a Kenpo student and cannot speak to issues of speed. In my own time, I have practiced my art at varying tempos thoughout the years and have found that in the study of my art, high rates of speed invariably has led to injury and control issues. Too, certain types of technique, intrinsic to San Soo, must be performed in simulation or the result will be certain injury. Of other arts I could only make generalizations, but my remarks, here, should not be taken as contrasting differing technique, performance or suitability of our respective systems.

Ed Parker, no doubt has been very successful in the proliferation of Kenpo.  A model for others in the successful presentation of way of life. The system of instruction of Jimmy H. Woo, was in place and had been that way for some time when I came on board. It stayed the same up until his death. Frank Woolsey ran a whole different deal with contracts and a set curriculum. I cannot say where these ideas originated but it was a very different business plan from the one I am witness to at Jimmy H. Woo's El Monte Studio. The studio I knew had few rules or formal requirements. Of this, I know, as much of what I do nowadays is an attempt to fortify and reinforce our learning base.

Previous to 1970, I cannot say what cliques existed or who influenced whom. Ark Wong being in the mix would indicate a time prior to my experience. I am only commenting based on my own experiences. The fact that Jimmy H. Woo and Ed Parker and the whole colorful crew, socialized, is really very interesting. 

Jimmy had several names. This, coming from how he was known to the US government, to his relations and family. James is not one I have heard. His wife, Bernice, (pronounce bernis) called him Jim.

At any rate, let me reiterate again that my comments are not meant to contrast San Soo with Kenpo. Many practitioners and systems have shown lasting durability here in America. We all benefit as a community.


Thanks for allowing me a place in your discussion. Nice to meet you, Doc.

PBMaster.


----------



## Tames D

Mr. Borisoff - 

I agree with everything you say. Incidentally, I trained with Frank Woolsey and Dennis Kirby in the 70's in Orange County. Do you know what happened to these men?


----------



## PBMaster

Do I know what happened to Frank Woolsey or Dennis Kirby.

No, I don't.  Frank is rumored to be on the east coast.

Bill Hulsey did a talk about Frank at my school several years ago.
I felt that Frank was an important  person in our history.
It was entertaining.  He was a character.

Bill Hulsey knows more about him.

I have a dvd of that lecture or a few years ago.

Hope you are enjoying your present study.

PB


----------



## rudy fox

Perhaps I missed it in the thread...but what is the 'sister art'?


----------



## Tames D

rudy fox said:
			
		

> Perhaps I missed it in the thread...but what is the 'sister art'?


 
 I believe it is JKD


----------



## L Canyon

I just was promoted to Brown Belt in San Soo by Master Borisoff. I am psyched! 

I hope some MT'ers stop by his school in reseda sometime - would be a pleasure to meet you chaps (and chapettes).


----------



## Carol

L Canyon said:
			
		

> I just was promoted to Brown Belt in San Soo by Master Borisoff. I am psyched!
> 
> I hope some MT'ers stop by his school in reseda sometime - would be a pleasure to meet you chaps (and chapettes).


 
Congratulations LC!  Great job to you!   It's been interesting to learn more about San Soo from the discussion.  Would be great to meet you folks as well if my boss ever allows me to leave the east coast :rofl:


----------



## L Canyon

Thank you Carol!

You should take a vacation and come out to the west coast. Dr. Chapel teaches in Torrance, I beleive, Larry Tatum in Pasadena - you would have your hands full visiting all the masters here. Thanks again.


----------



## DavidSelders

QUI-GON said:


> Mr. Borisoff -
> 
> I agree with everything you say. Incidentally, I trained with Frank Woolsey and Dennis Kirby in the 70's in Orange County. Do you know what happened to these men?


 
Dennis Kirby is my teacher, he lives in Kalispell, Montana.


----------



## Tames D

DavidSelders said:


> Dennis Kirby is my teacher, he lives in Kalispell, Montana.


 
I sent you a PM.


----------



## tom fox

Hello, I studied San Soo in the early 70's. There was not much structure and the belts did take a long time in coming. I enjoyed my classes very much. We were taught to learn the lesson slowly and that speed and power would come as we mastered the lesson. I have studied other arts over the years and wish I had a good San Soo instructor close by. I had just earnrd my black belt when I went overseas and miss the art very much. I practice all that I can and incorporate San Soo in to my classes as much as possible. I do remember my instructor telling us that if we survived the streets in LA then we won our tournament, meaning that we did not have rules in our art except to win.

Fox


----------



## L Canyon

tom fox said:


> Hello, I studied San Soo in the early 70's. There was not much structure and the belts did take a long time in coming. I enjoyed my classes very much. We were taught to learn the lesson slowly and that speed and power would come as we mastered the lesson. I have studied other arts over the years and wish I had a good San Soo instructor close by. I had just earnrd my black belt when I went overseas and miss the art very much. I practice all that I can and incorporate San Soo in to my classes as much as possible. I do remember my instructor telling us that if we survived the streets in LA then we won our tournament, meaning that we did not have rules in our art except to win.
> 
> Fox



Tom - who was your teacher in the 1970's? My instructor, Paul Borisoff, studied with Chuck Cory and Jimmy Woo.

Thank you - Randy


----------

