# Well I feel like an idiot.



## Ironbear24 (May 17, 2016)

So I been taking this class for a while now and I thought it was kenpo. Although this "kenpo" seemed very different from what I was taught before. 

I mentioned the term kenpo and Sifu looked at me kind of silly and asked "why do you always talk about kenpo ?" I replied "because that is what we are being taught here right?" He looked at me like, no. This is Shou Shu. I said oh, I guess I saw the wrong website then and thought this was that place. 

From there everyone was laughing at me, but I laughed to, and then I told him "you know, that's ok, because it seems I accidentally found something else that is awesome." 

I have confidence in this style. However I cannot lie and say that I am disappointed I had not been continuing my kenpo training. I will someday in the future complete it, but for now I wish to give Shou Shu a chance.

What do you guys know of this style? To me it feels like kenpo, but a little different, it feels more "Chinese" than kenpo did, I know kenpo is a Japanese art but it did come from white crane kung fu and has lots of Chinese Influence.

Anyway, what I am asking is, I didn't pay for ******** did I?


----------



## Flying Crane (May 17, 2016)

What is your Kenpo lineage?  if it's a Chow/Parker derived, it is not from white crane.  If the term is used in referenced to the Okinawan methods, there is Fujian white crane influence.  Be aware there are at least a couple different white crane methods that's are not related.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 17, 2016)

Ed Parker kenpo.


----------



## Dirty Dog (May 17, 2016)

I don't suppose the name of the system ought to matter... you were happy with it when you thought it was Kenpo, and, as they say, a rose by any other name...


----------



## JowGaWolf (May 18, 2016)

Ha ha ha..  I always wondered why you say Kempo and Sifu all the time in the same sentence. lol.   This is the first time that I've heard of it. Totally stumped on this one.  I watched 3 different videos of this stuff and all 3 look different.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 18, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> Ha ha ha..  I always wondered why you say Kempo and Sifu all the time in the same sentence. lol.   This is the first time that I've heard of it. Totally stumped on this one.  I watched 3 different videos of this stuff and all 3 look different.


Is that a bad or a good thing?


----------



## JowGaWolf (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> Is that a bad or a good thing?


I don't know. 
I didn't like what I saw in this form. It looked as if it has a Filipino martial art named Mongoose in it. The feet were too close when launching and returning some of the kicks. And there were just a lot of hand movements that I didn't like. Sort of like when I watch Mongoose practitioners go through their forms. 





The other videos I saw looked more like a Chinese martial art or more like a karate style art.  Each school was different.  It seems they have been around for a while so my guess is that it's possible a school will lean more to one influence than the other.










The only real way to have an idea if you are learning useless stuff is to see techniques from your school or to see a kata /form from that you have learned. If your school does kata.

the good news is that none of the drills looked like McDojo stuff. Some of the application for a legit technique seem questionable, like Right technique wrong application of it. But other than that, I'm thinking your school is probably different from the others I saw.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 18, 2016)

Well it's a lot of wrist locks and leverage techniques. Lots of low kicks and centerline punches and strikes.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 18, 2016)

What confuses me though is what type of art it is? Chinese or Japanese? Why do we wear gi's and have belts?


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> Ed Parker kenpo.


Everything is kenpo. You were just being taught by a guy that didn't understand the term.


----------



## Buka (May 18, 2016)

You're not alone, Ironbear, I've been doing Tai-chi for a couple months now, I have no idea what style of Tai-chi. I'm sure I heard it at the outset, and Xue hooked me up and I know he told me. (Thanks again, Xue) but I don't really care. I just love doing it.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> What confuses me though is what type of art it is? Chinese or Japanese? Why do we wear gi's and have belts?



This isn't Bullshido, so I won't say anything about Shou Shu.  I will say that I did some Googling and what I saw was not encouraging.  I am no expert, don't take this personally or seriously.  You need to do your own due diligence on this one.


----------



## JR 137 (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> What confuses me though is what type of art it is? Chinese or Japanese? Why do we wear gi's and have belts?



It's the type of art that helps you beat down idiots without getting carried away who rip their shirts off, tell you MA is worthless, and swing at you at a friend's party.  

Need more?


----------



## Kenpoguy123 (May 18, 2016)

If you trained in American kenpo surely you'd have noticed this place wasnt the same when they didnt do the techniques like delayed sword, alternating maces, five swords etc and the forms completely different


----------



## dancingalone (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> So I been taking this class for a while now and I thought it was kenpo. Although this "kenpo" seemed very different from what I was taught before.
> 
> I mentioned the term kenpo and Sifu looked at me kind of silly and asked "why do you always talk about kenpo ?" I replied "because that is what we are being taught here right?" He looked at me like, no. This is Shou Shu. I said oh, I guess I saw the wrong website then and thought this was that place.
> 
> ...



You are training in kenpo. The guy that originally came up with Shou Sou (whatever creation myths are floating around today) was a student in Tracy kenpo back in the sixties or so.  From what I gather, some colorful tales about the founder training with Chinese monks and and being the whatever generation successor of Some Cool Temple and such made its way into the style's history.

This is a very common problem in martial arts where some school heads felt the need to embellish on the truth to give themselves legitimacy and a competitive edge over other arts and schools.  It's happened in Shaolin-do, in Hwarang-do, and a few other kenpo styles including Shou Shu.

This doesn't mean the training you are receiving is bad.  If you enjoy the classes and find value in them, great.


----------



## zzj (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> What confuses me though is what type of art it is? Chinese or Japanese? Why do we wear gi's and have belts?



I hope I'm not violating any terms here, this is just my opinion: the name shou shu in itself is rather clunky (as in, it is not something a native Chinese speaker would have come up with), when directly translated to Chinese it would mean animal/beast method/skill. Read the supposed history of the style, but my own conclusion is that it is very much a made up style that incorporates stylistic elements taken from different Chinese animal styles. Unfortunately, it mixes Japanese conventions with Chinese elements in a way that dilutes any sense of authenticity that it claims in its history.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 18, 2016)

Bill Mattocks said:


> This isn't Bullshido, so I won't say anything about Shou Shu.  I will say that I did some Googling and what I saw was not encouraging.  I am no expert, don't take this personally or seriously.  You need to do your own due diligence on this one.



PM me.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 18, 2016)

Kenpoguy123 said:


> If you trained in American kenpo surely you'd have noticed this place wasnt the same when they didnt do the techniques like delayed sword, alternating maces, five swords etc and the forms completely different



Well there was delayed sword or deflecting hammer or anything like that, but the stances are the same and many of the principals are the similar. 

This is why I just figured it was a different style of kenpo.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 18, 2016)

Shou shu, from what I can tell, is not Chinese per say... 



> Albert F. Moore, Sr., formally known as Da Shifu Moore, was the founder (Sijo) and Grandmaster of Shou Shu Kung Fu in the United States. Al Moore, Sr., studied the martial arts beginning at age thirteen with the Chin family in the San Francisco bay area.
> 
> After many years of study, he eventually received a degree in engineering and served in the United States Navy (Pacific campaign) during World War II. To further his martial arts training, he was sponsored by the Chin family and studied kung fu in China in the city of Tianjin. In addition to the fighting aspects of kung fu, he also was taught Tui Na. Upon returning to the US, he eventually studied other martial arts including Parker Kempo, Jujitsu, and Shuai Shu. After some time in teaching martial arts, in particular Kenpo, and only teaching Shou Shu to those kenpo black belts who had achieved 4th Dan, he started the Moore's Shou Shu Martial Arts schools which solely taught principles of Shou Shu Kung Fu. For over forty years, Da Shifu Al Moore, Sr., his brothers (Ralph and Vern Moore), and his son Jung Moon Al Moore, II, taught and preserved Shou Shu kung fu. In 2001, Al Moore, Sr., died in California.
> 
> Prior to his death, Da Shifu Moore, Sr., returned to China in 1992 with his son to visit the school (Quan) where he studied Shou Shu.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 18, 2016)

Yeah, from what I can tell, it's a modern American art using a grab bag of Chinese and Japanese cultural trappings and Chinese terminology and probably some bogus history. Nothing too unusual about that, honestly. I watched some videos on YouTube. Not my cup of tea, but I have seen worse out there.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 18, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yeah, from what I can tell, it's a modern American art using a grab bag of Chinese and Japanese cultural trappings and Chinese terminology and probably some bogus history. Nothing too unusual about that, honestly. I watched some videos on YouTube. Not my cup of tea, but I have seen worse out there.



Is there anything bad about it or is it a matter of preference?


----------



## JowGaWolf (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> Well it's a lot of wrist locks and leverage techniques. Lots of low kicks and centerline punches and strikes.


That the Chinese MA influence. High kicks are discouraged because there are a lot of groin strikes in CMAs. It's definitely not Chinese or Japanese

If I had to guess I would say it's a hybrid of at least 3 different fighting systems. Chinese, Japanese, and Filipino martial arts. It's definitely a modern martial art system. 
Because of what I saw from other Shou Shu schools. The only way to really know if you are learning crap is going to be based entirely on your teacher.  I saw some videos where I wouldn't touch the Shou Shu school with a 10 foot pole, and then I saw another Shou Shu school that looked legit because they had clips of the actual teaching and it looked as if he understood the application. 

Based on what your Sifu has been telling you and how others have said the same thing that you Sifu has said when giving advice, you are probably not at risk of learning crap.  It's just really difficult for many of us to really know mainly because there's not much footage of it beyond demos and this school.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> Is there anything bad about it or is it a matter of preference?



Look at it this way...

When you get involved with a martial art that has a 'known' name, certain assumptions are made.  Those assumptions may or may not be correct, right?  Just because someone hangs out a shingle and says they teach XYZ style, it doesn't mean that they are good or bad.  It's down to the instructor and the student, for the most part.

However, with a 'name' brand, you also get more of an ability to check on things.  For example, lineage and the known history of a given instructor.

I like the fact that the style I train in has a 'name' that is recognized, that I belong to a branch of that style that has garnered some respect from serious martial artists over the years, and that my instructor is highly admired and respected in our style.  None of that makes him a great teach or me a great student, but they help me to be sure I'm getting excellent training.  The rest is up to me, to use my own brain to determine if what I am being taught is real and 'works' or not.

It is certainly possible, as others have said, for a system to be created which is effective and instruction which is high-quality, but which has little in the way of lineage or history.  If it works, it works.  But there is less there to be investigated ahead of time; a prospective student must take a bigger leap of faith that the training they will get will be effective and 'work'.

When a synthetic history is created that the founder holds out to be factual, and it appears that it may not be factual, although the actual art itself may still be effective, the fact that the story surrounding it was deliberately distorted is kind of a strike against it - at least to me.

_"Here is an apple.  It was grown in the king's garden and came from a tree that has produced delicious apples for hundreds of years.  It is delicious."_​
Versus

_"Here is an apple.  I plucked it from a tree I found growing wild in a forest.  It is delicious."_​
Now, either apple may be delicious, right?  But I would tend to TRUST the first statement if I had to pick one without tasting first.

If it turns out that the guy making the first statement is lying about where the apple came from, then even if the apple was delicious, I would have less respect for the person who lied to me about it.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> Is there anything bad about it or is it a matter of preference?



Do you enjoy it?
Do you like what you have learned?


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 18, 2016)

Xue Sheng said:


> Do you enjoy it?
> Do you like what you have learned?



Yes and no, I wish we sparred more often, I wish the classes were longer than 1 hour. The sifu does say stupid things sometimes like "I've seen guys beat up 7 guys all by himself." And "the FBI investigated me for having more than one Facebook account" idk about that one..... 

"I can't kick higher than my waist but I never need too" 

There are also very great things he does too though. He 90% of the time works with us, other dojos I have been too that is rarely the case and they normally had a 1st Dan or brown belt teach. 

What I do like though is he does seem to think he or Shou Shu is invincible and even takes other martial arts. He trains in Brazilian Jiu Jutsu which in my personal opinion I feel that style is over rated, but it is good at what it is designed to do.

I guess it's more bjj's religious following that annoys me becuase the style itself is nearly identical to Judo which I really enjoy.

Anyway the fact this guy is willing to take other styles outside of his shows me a lot about himself. It's like he is similar to me and understands that martial arts is a never ending journey. My old sifu only trained in kenpo and never anything else as far as know.

Plus this dude's charisma is pretty cool, it's like I'm being trained by a George Lopez that knows martial arts.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> Is there anything bad about it or is it a matter of preference?


I saw various things which I could criticize technically, but I'm not going to badmouth an entire art because of some random demos where I don't know the expertise level of the individuals involved.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 18, 2016)

So, does your school not have any signage or literature identifying the art being taught?

Anyway, if you end up sticking with your instructor and become an expert in Shou Shu, you'll have a great story for when people ask you "how did you get involved in the art?"


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 18, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> So, does your school not have any signage or literature identifying the art being taught?
> 
> Anyway, if you end up sticking with your instructor and become an expert in Shou Shu, you'll have a great story for when people ask you "how did you get involved in the art?"



The sign of the building says karate academy. I guess that it is fitting since it seems to be Tracy kenpo with Chinese and Filipino influence.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> Is there anything bad about it or is it a matter of preference?


It opens the possibility to a lot of problems, but those problems are not guaranteed.  It really depends on how well the elements were synthesized and mixed, and what those elements are.

In the systems with older, established traditions, there is usually a very specific set of underlying principles and concepts that drives how things are done and how the training manifests in order to be consistent with those principles.  Some systems may have very different principles that could even be opposed to those of other systems, and simply do not mix well.  If you insist on mixing them, it's like building contradictions right into the methodology.  Other times the principles may be the same or similar, but how it manifests in the methodology is vastly different, again with contradictions.  You see this when people just collect forms from different systems, without actually studying the systems to understand the principles and the methodology.  Some of this stuff just doesn't mix well, and people tend to neglect asking the hard question of, "should I NOT include this material in what I do?" Because everyone just wants to keep adding more.  There are some things that, based on what you already do, you should discard or NOT add to your tool bag.

As an ex-Tracy Kenpo guy myself, I recognize this problem particularly with the Tracy lineages of Kenpo and the offshoots of Tracy kenpo, the adopted Chinese hand forms and the Chinese weaponry and Japanese katana forms.  There are a bunch of these that should not have been adopted, that are just inappropriate in that context.


----------



## JowGaWolf (May 18, 2016)

Flying Crane said:


> It opens the possibility to a lot of problems, but those problems are not guaranteed.  It really depends on how well the elements were synthesized and mixed, and what those elements are.
> 
> In the systems with older, established traditions, there is usually a very specific set of underlying principles and concepts that drives how things are done and how the training manifests in order to be consistent with those principles.  Some systems may have very different principles that could even be opposed to those of other systems, and simply do not mix well.  If you insist on mixing them, it's like building contradictions right into the methodology.  Other times the principles may be the same or similar, but how it manifests in the methodology is vastly different, again with contradictions.  You see this when people just collect forms from different systems, without actually studying the systems to understand the principles and the methodology.  Some of this stuff just doesn't mix well, and people tend to neglect asking the hard question of, "should I NOT include this material in what I do?" Because everyone just wants to keep adding more.  There are some things that, based on what you already do, you should discard or NOT add to your tool bag.
> 
> As an ex-Tracy Kenpo guy myself, I recognize this problem particularly with the Tracy lineages of Kenpo and the offshoots of Tracy kenpo, the adopted Chinese hand forms and the Chinese weaponry and Japanese katana forms.  There are a bunch of these that should not have been adopted, that are just inappropriate in that context.


Just adding to what you have stated. Usually hybrid martial arts will mix from the same over all collective systems.  For example, a hybrid Japanese system would be a mixture of 2 or more different Japanese fighting systems.  A hybrid Chinese fighting system will mix 2 or more different Chinese fighting systems.  This type of mixing would be easier because there would be similar foundations and concepts.   A hybrid that is a mix of 2 or more completely different fighting systems would be tough.  Kung Fu + Shuai Jiao  flows better than Kung Fu + BJJ. 

When I was watching the videos of the system, I could tell which instructors had a Chinese Martial arts background and which one's didn't.  The ones that didn't had applications that seemed to flow in a strange manner and It felt awkward when I tried to do it the same way they were doing it.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 18, 2016)

I will probably look akward then because my foundation  style is and always will be kenpo karate. That was the first thing i ever had experience with.


----------



## JowGaWolf (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> I will probably look akward then because my foundation  style is and always will be kenpo karate. That was the first thing i ever had experience with.


 Yep you may have awkward moments when a technique requires a Chinese stance and not a Japanese stance.  The way that these stances are done will either make the next technique easy or difficult. Me using a Japanese horse stance will prevent me from being able to move quickly using some of the Chinese foot work.  I guess you'll end up learning boy ways.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 18, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> That the Chinese MA influence. High kicks are discouraged because there are a lot of groin strikes in CMAs. It's definitely not Chinese or Japanese
> 
> If I had to guess I would say it's a hybrid of at least 3 different fighting systems. Chinese, Japanese, and Filipino martial arts. It's definitely a modern martial art system.
> Because of what I saw from other Shou Shu schools. The only way to really know if you are learning crap is going to be based entirely on your teacher.  I saw some videos where I wouldn't touch the Shou Shu school with a 10 foot pole, and then I saw another Shou Shu school that looked legit because they had clips of the actual teaching and it looked as if he understood the application.
> ...


I watched snippets of this video, and here is what I see:

The way they move is very much Tracy Kenpo.  Not surprising, didn't the founder train in Tracy Kenpo?

I did not recognize the specific self defense scenario combinations they were practicing as being from Tracy, but I only watched a couple so definitely could have missed some.  I wasn't going to sit thru 47 minutes of video.   Could be the founder created his own combos for his own curriculum.

The wearing of the karate belt knot on the hip screams Parker Kenpo.  Al Tracy is very much opposed to that.  I personally do not like it.


----------



## JowGaWolf (May 18, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> I will probably look akward then because my foundation  style is and always will be kenpo karate. That was the first thing i ever had experience with.


Forgot to tell you that we have a new student that comes from a Karate background.  He "bleeds" Karate in all of his stances and punches, we give him a pass and just work changing his habit bit by bit.


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 19, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> Yes and no, I wish we sparred more often, I wish the classes were longer than 1 hour. The sifu does say stupid things sometimes like "I've seen guys beat up 7 guys all by himself." And "the FBI investigated me for having more than one Facebook account" idk about that one.....
> 
> "I can't kick higher than my waist but I never need too"
> 
> ...


If he says he never kicks above the waste, I am liking this guy, already.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 19, 2016)

Touch Of Death said:


> If he says he never kicks above the waste, I am liking this guy, already.



But high kicks look cool.


----------



## Touch Of Death (May 19, 2016)

Ironbear24 said:


> But high kicks look cool.


They mess up the kenpo of things. This stuff is supposed to flow like water.


----------



## Ironbear24 (May 19, 2016)

Touch Of Death said:


> They mess up the kenpo of things. This stuff is supposed to flow like water.



Ok. I'll obey what the sifu says.


----------



## Flying Crane (May 19, 2016)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Look at it this way...
> 
> When you get involved with a martial art that has a 'known' name, certain assumptions are made.  Those assumptions may or may not be correct, right?  Just because someone hangs out a shingle and says they teach XYZ style, it doesn't mean that they are good or bad.  It's down to the instructor and the student, for the most part.
> 
> ...


Here's another way to look at it.  It doesn't take a whole lot to hurt someone, if fighting is all you want.  You don't need an excellent method or superior technique or skills to be a good fighter.  Raw aggression, athleticism, natural talent, and an underlying meanness can carry one far, if fighting success is the desire.  It can be enough to dominate over some well trained people in a "superior" system, if those people lack in the other departments.  If you give this fellow some rudimentary training that improves some basic techniques and gives him a fundamental strategy, even if the sophistication of this training is not deep, he can be fearsome if he has the will to be.  However, that doesn't make him a teacher, doesn't give him much to teach, and makes it unlikely that a student of his would be likewise successful if he too lacked in any of the personal characteristics that make the fellow successful.  He may be fearsome, but his real skill may not be high and his real knowledge isn't much to speak of.

A well established system with a long tradition and history has probably developed a methodology that is sophisticated and a pedagogy that has been successful, and provides the tools and methodology to train students who can still be successful even if their personality is not so aggressive, or they are not so athletic or gifted in natural ability.  This provides the tools to teach a next generation to a high level of skill and knowledge.

In my opinion, the melting pot of the USA can produce a lot of the former, and fewer of the latter.  People freely mix and mash things together in the spirit of individualism, and often the results are less than the sum of the parts.  The real training they have received is shallow, so people with the entrepreneurial spirit start to throw everything together that they can find, that they can get from a video or a weekend seminar or in a brief stint with a good instructor that didn't last long enough, in hopes of making up for the deficiency.  This is what I feel often happens with eclectic styles.

When choosing a school, this is something to think about, especially if it is a "new" eclectic mix being taught.  And ask yourself, is the teacher a good fighter, AND does he have a lot of real knowledge and skill AND does he have much to teach?  Because one does not automatically assume the other.


----------



## JKDJade (Nov 1, 2020)

Ironbear24 said:


> So I been taking this class for a while now and I thought it was kenpo. Although this "kenpo" seemed very different from what I was taught before.
> 
> I mentioned the term kenpo and Sifu looked at me kind of silly and asked "why do you always talk about kenpo ?" I replied "because that is what we are being taught here right?" He looked at me like, no. This is Shou Shu. I said oh, I guess I saw the wrong website then and thought this was that place.
> 
> ...




Shou Shu, is a gimmick. It's repacked Tracy Kenpo. I studied kenpo before, then moved to Monterey, Ca in 2010 and found this Shou Shu place. It said it was Chinese martial arts, but they called it Moore's Karate...umm ok. Then they wore karate pants, with the chinese kung fu top and karate belts lol.  Anyways the whole story of Jimmy Chin and the secret art is pure bullshido. Anhyone who has studied Tracy Kenpo can see that shou shu is exactly that, they have some veriations and renamed all the techniques. Still not a bad style, if you like kenpo.


----------



## JKDJade (Nov 1, 2020)

Ironbear24 said:


> What confuses me though is what type of art it is? Chinese or Japanese? Why do we wear gi's and have belts?



It's Stockton-nese. Pure American bullshido.


----------



## martialarts4life (Sep 4, 2022)

Flying Crane said:


> I watched snippets of this video, and here is what I see:
> 
> The way they move is very much Tracy Kenpo.  Not surprising, didn't the founder train in Tracy Kenpo?
> 
> ...


Yes, Al Moore, his brother Ralph Moore, and Al's son Vern (Al Moore, Jr.) were Tracy Kenpo Karate students in the early to mid 1960's.  They were beginner white belts with no prior training. They did not ever study directly from or with any of the Tracy brothers, but did study under assistant instructors Steven Labounty, Bob Blackmoore, and Ted Sumner. Mr. Labounty passed away recently, Mr. Blackmoore passed away about 20 years ago, and Mr. Sumner lives in Texas and still teaches part-time. I spoke with Al Tracy on the telephone in 2008, so that is where I got this information. After earning their 1st degree black belts, Al, Ralph, and Vern moved on to study a style called BoK Fu Do (System of the White Tiger) from Richard Lee in the late 1960's. Al and Ralph earned their black belts in the late 1960's, and Al Moore, Jr. earned his black belt in the early 1970's. Kind of odd that it wasn't a sash considering Mr. Lee teaches a kung fu style. Mr. Lee was a former high ranking Tracy kenpo black belt that broke off and started his own style. After earning their 1st degree black belts, the Moore's took over the lease of one of Mr. Lee's schools and opened their own school teaching their Americanized made-up style of Shou shu, which is simply just a blend of what they learned in Tracy kenpo and Bod Fu Do packaged under a fancy name with a slick marketing plan. Shou Shu has elements of Shuai Jaio or Chaio (pronounced "shu-ee-jow", Chinese wrestling originating in Beijing), which makes sense considering Mr. Lee's style would have a bit of that in the curriculum.

I have heard many different backstory's from those that are part of the Moore's chain of schools, however, nobody has been able to provide names of any Grandmaster's in China, pictures of training, tea ceremonies, copies of passports, etc., to substantiate any of the stories that I have heard about Al Moore's supposed training in China sometime after WWII. I did hear of someone named Lu Chin but no kung fu expert that I've spoken with (Doc Fai Wong, Tat-Mau Wong, the Lacey brothers. etc.) has ever heard of this person, if he ever existed.

One last thing, I find the combining of kung fu uniforms and a Japanese belt system to be quite odd. Richard Lee does have a similar uniform as well as small circular patches representing his organization, so I understand where the Moore's got their uniform system and animal patches on the belts. Karate is heavily influenced by the Chinese martial arts, so maybe that is why Al Moore decided to combine the two. Outside of the United States, one will never find this in Japan or China.


----------



## martialarts4life (Sep 4, 2022)

JKDJade said:


> Shou Shu, is a gimmick. It's repacked Tracy Kenpo. I studied kenpo before, then moved to Monterey, Ca in 2010 and found this Shou Shu place. It said it was Chinese martial arts, but they called it Moore's Karate...umm ok. Then they wore karate pants, with the chinese kung fu top and karate belts lol.  Anyways the whole story of Jimmy Chin and the secret art is pure bullshido. Anhyone who has studied Tracy Kenpo can see that shou shu is exactly that, they have some veriations and renamed all the techniques. Still not a bad style, if you like kenpo.


Al Moore, his brother Ralph Moore, and Al's son Vern (Al Moore, Jr.) were Tracy Kenpo Karate students in the early to mid 1960's.  They were beginner white belts with no prior training. They did not ever study directly from or with any of the Tracy brothers, but did study under assistant instructors Steven Labounty, Bob Blackmoore, and Ted Sumner. Mr. Labounty passed away recently, Mr. Blackmoore passed away about 20 years ago, and Mr. Sumner lives in Texas and still teaches part-time. I spoke with Al Tracy on the telephone in 2008, so that is where I got this information. After earning their 1st degree black belts, Al, Ralph, and Vern moved on to study a style called BoK Fu Do (System of the White Tiger) from Richard Lee in the late 1960's. Al and Ralph earned their black belts in the late 1960's, and Al Moore, Jr. earned his black belt in the early 1970's. Kind of odd that it wasn't a sash considering Mr. Lee teaches a kung fu style. Mr. Lee was a former high ranking Tracy kenpo black belt that broke off and started his own style. After earning their 1st degree black belts, the Moore's took over the lease of one of Mr. Lee's schools and opened their own school teaching their Americanized made-up style of Shou shu, which is simply just a blend of what they learned in Tracy kenpo and Bod Fu Do packaged under a fancy name with a slick marketing plan. Shou Shu has elements of Shuai Jaio or Chaio (pronounced "shu-ee-jow", Chinese wrestling originating in Beijing), which makes sense considering Mr. Lee's style would have a bit of that in the curriculum.

I have heard many different backstory's from those that are part of the Moore's chain of schools, however, nobody has been able to provide names of any Grandmaster's in China, pictures of training, tea ceremonies, copies of passports, etc., to substantiate any of the stories that I have heard about Al Moore's supposed training in China sometime after WWII. I did hear of someone named Lu Chin but no kung fu expert that I've spoken with (Doc Fai Wong, Tat-Mau Wong, the Lacey brothers. etc.) has ever heard of this person, if he ever existed.

One last thing, I find the combining of kung fu uniforms and a Japanese belt system to be quite odd. Richard Lee does have a similar uniform as well as small circular patches representing his organization, so I understand where the Moore's got their uniform system and animal patches on the belts. Karate is heavily influenced by the Chinese martial arts, so maybe that is why Al Moore decided to combine the two. Outside of the United States, one will never find this in Japan or China.


----------



## Buka (Sep 4, 2022)

martialarts4life said:


> Yes, Al Moore, his brother Ralph Moore, and Al's son Vern (Al Moore, Jr.) were Tracy Kenpo Karate students in the early to mid 1960's.  They were beginner white belts with no prior training. They did not ever study directly from or with any of the Tracy brothers, but did study under assistant instructors Steven Labounty, Bob Blackmoore, and Ted Sumner. Mr. Labounty passed away recently, Mr. Blackmoore passed away about 20 years ago, and Mr. Sumner lives in Texas and still teaches part-time. I spoke with Al Tracy on the telephone in 2008, so that is where I got this information. After earning their 1st degree black belts, Al, Ralph, and Vern moved on to study a style called BoK Fu Do (System of the White Tiger) from Richard Lee in the late 1960's. Al and Ralph earned their black belts in the late 1960's, and Al Moore, Jr. earned his black belt in the early 1970's. Kind of odd that it wasn't a sash considering Mr. Lee teaches a kung fu style. Mr. Lee was a former high ranking Tracy kenpo black belt that broke off and started his own style. After earning their 1st degree black belts, the Moore's took over the lease of one of Mr. Lee's schools and opened their own school teaching their Americanized made-up style of Shou shu, which is simply just a blend of what they learned in Tracy kenpo and Bod Fu Do packaged under a fancy name with a slick marketing plan. Shou Shu has elements of Shuai Jaio or Chaio (pronounced "shu-ee-jow", Chinese wrestling originating in Beijing), which makes sense considering Mr. Lee's style would have a bit of that in the curriculum.
> 
> I have heard many different backstory's from those that are part of the Moore's chain of schools, however, nobody has been able to provide names of any Grandmaster's in China, pictures of training, tea ceremonies, copies of passports, etc., to substantiate any of the stories that I have heard about Al Moore's supposed training in China sometime after WWII. I did hear of someone named Lu Chin but no kung fu expert that I've spoken with (Doc Fai Wong, Tat-Mau Wong, the Lacey brothers. etc.) has ever heard of this person, if he ever existed.
> 
> One last thing, I find the combining of kung fu uniforms and a Japanese belt system to be quite odd. Richard Lee does have a similar uniform as well as small circular patches representing his organization, so I understand where the Moore's got their uniform system and animal patches on the belts. Karate is heavily influenced by the Chinese martial arts, so maybe that is why Al Moore decided to combine the two. Outside of the United States, one will never find this in Japan or China.


Welcome to MartialTalk, bro.


----------



## isshinryuronin (Sep 4, 2022)

Buka said:


> Welcome to MartialTalk, bro.


I saw that you were the latest poster on this old thread, "Well I feel like an idiot," and felt compelled to read it.  Must admit I felt a little let down.  

Could be an entertaining MA thread if the title was taken literally.  I mean, we've all had moments...


----------



## punisher73 (Sep 7, 2022)

Quite a resurrection of the old thread!


----------



## Yanli (Sep 8, 2022)

Ironbear24 said:


> So I been taking this class for a while now and I thought it was kenpo. Although this "kenpo" seemed very different from what I was taught before.
> 
> I mentioned the term kenpo and Sifu looked at me kind of silly and asked "why do you always talk about kenpo ?" I replied "because that is what we are being taught here right?" He looked at me like, no. This is Shou Shu. I said oh, I guess I saw the wrong website then and thought this was that place.
> 
> ...


  The one thing to always remember, "it is not your form, strength, and so on that makes a great fighter, "IT IS YOU". If the form feels right to you, and you see yourself growing, then that form is just as good as any form.


----------

