Well I feel like an idiot.

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.
Click to expand...

Is there anything bad about it or is it a matter of preference?
 
Ironbear24 said:
Well it's a lot of wrist locks and leverage techniques. Lots of low kicks and centerline punches and strikes.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Ironbear24 said:
Is there anything bad about it or is it a matter of preference?
Click to expand...

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 said:
Do you enjoy it?
Do you like what you have learned?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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?"
 
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?"
Click to expand...

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.
 
Ironbear24 said:
Is there anything bad about it or is it a matter of preference?
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.

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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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"

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.
Click to expand...
If he says he never kicks above the waste, I am liking this guy, already. :)
 
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.

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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.

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?
Click to expand...


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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

What does martial+art teach someone?

Previous Thread

Failing a belt test

Next Thread

Similar threads

JKDJade
So Let Me Get This Straight-- Why Don't We Have New Arts?
7 8 9
Replies
177
Views
16K
Gerry Seymour
Gerry Seymour
Clark Kent
KT:Northern Shou Shu?
Replies
1
Views
4K
martialarts4life
M
Ceicei
Byron Crookston: Looking for Information
Replies
3
Views
1K
Ceicei
Ceicei
W
American Kenpo not a complete art?
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
6K
Saheim
Saheim
ackks10
Ghost students
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
Xue Sheng
Xue Sheng

Latest Discussions

Back
Top