USSD claim they teach shaolin, but where is it?
I didn’t know pinons and katas 1-6 were shaolin?
Two man fist set is an ed parker form which Fred Villari got back in the 60 training with him.
So where’s the shaolin?
Is Charles mattera lying to all his students about what they are learning?:eek:
Then what else is he lying about?
yea…so does other styles claim they teach shaolin or is shaolin. You never really know what you are geting into. All I can say research research research before you decide to join a MA school.
well technically karate came from some form of southern shaolin and southern shaolin came form shaolin and ussd crap came form karate, so technically if you want to be a a dousche bag it is shaolin. 
but we all know its karate or kenpo
[QUOTE=sk girl;762443]USSD claim they teach shaolin, but where is it?
I didn’t know pinons and katas 1-6 were shaolin?
Two man fist set is an ed parker form which Fred Villari got back in the 60 training with him.
So where’s the shaolin?
Is Charles mattera lying to all his students about what they are learning?:eek:
Then what else is he lying about?[/QUOTE]
there may likely be shaolin material that is present somewhere in the curriculum…but you never know how much, or how much it has changed from when it was first absorbed, or when you will actually learn it.
if what you really want is shaolin, i wouldnt really be looking for it there. but i guess we are generally all stuck where we live so you have to go for what you have near unfortunately. there is plenty of shaolin in the states, you just have to be in the right area, or get lucky and find someone who has it but doesnt promote it so much.
personally i dont train ussd so im not too sure.
[QUOTE=Shaolinlueb;763008]well technically karate came from some form of southern shaolin and southern shaolin came form shaolin and ussd crap came form karate, so technically if you want to be a a dousche bag it is shaolin.
but we all know its karate or kenpo[/QUOTE]
lol
that was a good one
people claim alot of things. McDonalds says their burgers are 100% beef, yet when I make a burger at home, it doesn’t taste at all alike.
Well Mattera did change the Black Belt curriculum to a more Kung Fu style. More so than any other Shaolin Kempo styles out there(Emperado’s Kajukenbo, Ralph Castro or Villari)
More like Won Hop Kuen Do style that Al Dacascos started when he split off the Kempo lineage.
USSD may suck at teaching the art cuase the business aspect dilutes it. However, the art itself is good IMHO. They just need to stop churning out “black belts” so that they can offer more schools. They need to stop letting 1st Degree balck blets issued after 2yrs of study, and no other prior exp in MA, be chief instructors.
Is it Shaolin? NO. In my experience of Shaolin, USSD’s training method differs to that of Shaolin training. ONe in particular is that USSD does not emphasize stance training and proper transition drills. Is it Kung Fu? Not in the color belt stages. However, the concepts changes, which I believe confuses the heck out of any student if this was thier first experience in MA. Again another fault in teaching method. Anyone with any background with CMA will be able to pick up the transition. Other tend to do CMA using Japenese MA foundation.
As I have said before. It is as close as you are going to get to CMA with an American derived system.
If you look at the roots of the system, you can better understand it and what is being taught to you. The main person in this system is James Mitose. If you believe the story, his MA was handed down by family directly from a Shaolin Monk. Nevertheless it is Japanese MA akin to Shorin Ryu. He then handed this down to Kwai Sun Chow. Chinese decent with a background in Chinese boxing. His Shaolin link has been in dispute, so I am not even going to bring that out. But the man can fight. So there you have the Kung Fu/Karate explaination.
Fast fwd to the Ken(m)po contemporaries:
Ed Parker: Took out the circular movement, low stance, etc. that he deemed were to difficult for the American body to adapt. He added a bit of biology with rigard to motion and body mechanics into the art. It turned out looking more like fancy hand waving in my opinion.
Adriano Emperado et al: Took this art and added bits an pieces of other Asian arts that was lacking. Karate, Judo/Juijitsu, Kenpo, Chinese Boxing. There you have Kajukenbo. Later on Gary Forbach, who took over the reigns, when to China to study more CMA and incorporated it into the system.
Kwai Sun Chow: Kaharo Ho Kempo. This is probably the truest art of Kempo out there. Undiluted.
Then we go to offshoots:
Al Dacascos: Created Won Hop Kuen Do and added more CMA into the system. This is probably the most Kung Fu-like out of all the Kempo offshoots. If you ever see their forms in competition, you would swear it was modern Wushu.
Ralph Castro: Kept more of the American Kenpo of parker however, took in more of CMA into the system.
Nick Cerios: Instructor to Villari which, Mattera denies ever being a student of Villari but he was. Regardless, much like Castro kept the American Kenpo concept. He did change the forms however, more Karate in the color belts. And soft in the higher belts although still not Kung Fu.
He had 2 offshots. Villari and Mattera. Villari schools kept the Nick Cerios concept although Villari added a few forms. Matter broke off and kept much of the lower belt curriculum. Once USSD was established, he changed the black belt curriculum. There were a few black belt from other CMA arts and he assimilated their forms and concepts within the system. For example, I have a few forms I learned while there: Staff and Spear form from N Shaolin LF, Straight sword form from CLF and a broudsword form from N Shoalin.
Hope that explains it. I am by no means an expert. However, I have spent nearly 8yrs. in the Kempo world. Master Ralph Castro then Villari then eventually Mattera’s USSD.
Yea but therein lies the problem. Karate itself mainly derives from Japan. Kung Fu hails from China. Two different countries and in my opinion two different styles. Yea sure some can use the “shaolin blanket” that shaolin has influenced all other martial art styles but when schools go around saying they are teaching kung fu but wear karate gis and have a karate style ranking system is absurd.
I am not sure if I exactly agree with the mixing of MA styles. I think there are new fighting theories and systems that can be pioneered but when they are tossed out there and dubbed “shaolin” is insane.
Yea sure some can use the “shaolin blanket” that shaolin has influenced all other martial art styles but when schools go around saying they are teaching kung fu but wear karate gis and have a karate style ranking system is absurd
Also, a bit disrespectful to the karate/kenpo community, or whatever the majority of the art is derivef from I think. Adding 5% of a Chinese style doesn’t suddenly negate the 95% that’s from different roots. If you do all karate or kenpo barehand and basics then doing a few weapon forms from various Chinese styles isn’t going to change much.
Having taught both an old Tracy’s version of Kenpo and FV “Shaolin (ugh) Kempo” and being a Hung Kuen practitioner for over twenty years, I can say with authority that, one-Chow’s Kenpo is much closer to Hung Kuen, and Villari’s is an offshoot of Cerio, which like a xerox of a xerox, is very, very far from original kenpo, and completely unrelated to Kung-Fu. The forms are called Pinans and are so far from Pinan Kata, one would think he learned them from a book. Not only are sequences “different” but in some cases, movement is backwards. They also have forms called-get this-“Ancient Chinese Katas 1,2,3,4,5,6” yeah, I’m sure that’s real. They refer to techniques as “Kenpos” and “Jiu-Jitsus” , fer chrissakes, at least say “Kenpo techniques” it’s laughable, if it weren’t so painful.
-you should’ve stayed with Ralph Castro-he trained directly with Chow, alongside Ed Parker. You would’ve had something real.
Uuuhhh??
[QUOTE=Songshan;763108]Yea but therein lies the problem. Karate itself mainly derives from Japan. Kung Fu hails from China. Two different countries and in my opinion two different styles. Yea sure some can use the “shaolin blanket” that shaolin has influenced all other martial art styles but when schools go around saying they are teaching kung fu but wear karate gis and have a karate style ranking system is absurd.
I am not sure if I exactly agree with the mixing of MA styles. I think there are new fighting theories and systems that can be pioneered but when they are tossed out there and dubbed “shaolin” is insane.[/QUOTE] Aside from all the other BS, what does the uniform or belt system have to do with determining whether or not you do kung fu or karate or Shaolin or not?? many socalled TCMA schools have adopted belt / sash ranking systems, how does this make them any less traditional or authentic??
By the way most Japanese Karate comes from China. The original ideogram for Karate meant “china hand”.
Most of the people on this board have a no idea what true CMA or Kung Fu is. They get these ideas and images in their head from movies, media, and their instructors . Most people base their opinion on non intrinsic values( i.e. outward appearences , terminology, etc.) Why does any of this really matter ??
I have been doing Shaolin / Wudang arts for over 15 years and I can tell you that for application purposes all that flowery, soft crap that most of you do will get your @$$es handed to you in a real fight.
Shaolin and kung fu on the whole has been turned into just a form of exercise and performance art and has no true practical application. I often go to these so called traditional kung fu schools and watch them spar and practice application, it is a joke.
I am not a fan of USSD ,nor am I defending them, but some of you need to get a clue and get of your high horse, because before too long someone will come along and knock you off!!
And most likely it is going to be a MMA guy or someone from USSD.
Kung Fu ( martial arts) is for the intended effect, for the enemy or the opponent to be dispatched in the quickest , most efficient manner possible without any wasted time and effort.
oh and by the way
Shaolin and Kung fu are based on philosophy, basic stance trainig and practical application, and not whether you use english , japanese or chinese terminology or whether you have belts , gis , lion dances or specific forms, all this simple does not matter does not matter.
Get a clue people and start living in reality.
Personallly I think that people should stop refering to CMA as Kung Fu because even if you practice another martial art and have put time and effort or hard work you still essentially practice Kung Fu.
[QUOTE=tattooedmonk;763351]Shaolin and Kung fu are based on philosophy, basic stance trainig and practical application, and not whether you use english , japanese or chinese terminology or whether you have belts , gis , lion dances or specific forms, all this simple does not matter does not matter.
Get a clue people and start living in reality.
Personallly I think that people should stop refering to CMA as Kung Fu because even if you practice another martial art and have put time and effort or hard work you still essentially practice Kung Fu.[/QUOTE]
I agree. Isn’t it true that the traditional Masters of CMA practiced medicince, martial arts and the fine arts?
um, no. They were killers, with mind and body honed to deadly perfection. But not a sage, not Kwai Chang Caine. Wake up Dorothy. Do some real research. Look up who the real CMAists were. Not the ones from the Chinese folk dramas.
that being said, many of us still try to follow the way of the scholar warrior, and yes, Dorothy, I too still hold a warm part of my heart for David Carradine.
(But NOT Ralph Machio!)
Sorry for my ignorance as my web fu is pretty rusty. What is USSD?
Since I have nothing really relevant to say on the topic, afterall I don’t even know what USSD stands for, I’m just kinda throwing out things to a bunch of various topics in the thread.
Shaolin is based on Chan first and foremost. Shaolin based kung fu then in turn being a system of defense utilises that same religious/philosophical background. Chan being about self discipline and all that jazz, the horse stance training and conditioning and stuff that tattooedmonk said kinda follows right up in that line. Isn’t kinda funny though that Shaolin has embraced the “fluff” of its own name in recent years. Isn’t Chan about stripping away excess in route to personal development? I mean, I’m glad those guys finally got things like ummm, plumbing and all. But I thought all that other material stuff was kinda the whole problem that Tamo original scoffed at some 1500 years ago and started this whole Shaolin thing to begin with?
I do have to agree with the monk though; Gi’s, belts and all that stuff doesn’t make the art. If you really wanna get down to it, that whole orange shaolin suit thing that all the monks wore was just a uniform like any other. They all wore the same clothes, yeah I know they had that grey one too, at least they do for sell here 
And they all had the same haircut. But that just went along with the whole removing the individual self which aided in the transition of the material world to a state which could lead to personal mastery. You know how in the movies they have the guy at the altar getting his head shaved and they rename him and all that
Heck I usually just train in a ratty old shirt. And I hate wearing my sash. The only time I’m in “uniform” is on those occassions I meet my sifu at the kwoon. Usually when I’m with my friends though we are out in the yard wearing whatever. To quote that cheesy old movie Sidekicks, " No need Gi to break brick." I can see though why a lot of school use the Gi’s now though, it does stand up much better when training throws and Chi’ na type things.
The only thing that seperates kung fu as a martial art from other arts is the way in which it applies its use. All realistic MA are just different routes to the same end. Kung Fu, and TCMA as a whole are just one of them. And since TCMA are so broad even to define itself is impossible. The lines aren’t so black and white. The only real noticable difference is that TCMA in general apply more circular force than the other Asian arts (though that’s not all exclusive) and the one other thing is that it is also so linked with medical application. The old masters realised that in their times, just like in present day. One is much more likely do die of old age or illness than by a physical assault. So kung fu in general, places a lot more emphasis on physical development that the TJMA and Korean arts. Do those other guys PT too? Sure. But its not really placed within the curriculum so much.
You know one interesting thing. When I used to live in Okinawa and watch the old guys doing karate. There were a couple styles (Shohei Ryu is the only one I learned the name of) which really does still have a lot of kung fu flavor. The footwork is a bit more streamlined, a lot of emphasis on 3 stances (horse stance, forward stance and that weird karate not horse stance but not pok ma). But the hand technique was very much the same. They had the tiger and mantis and all that jazz going on. It was very interesting. I wish I could have spoken to the guy about the apps and stuff but well, my Japanese just wasn’t that good and I didn’t want to offend the guy, just walking up out of the blue and asking him about his MA.
Ummm…hmmm…the only other thing I can think of…Kung Fu masters were not killers as TT put it. Though they weren’t all the scholars either. They were just people. They were farmers, doctors, soldiers, cops, religious leaders…a lot like everyone today. The only difference is that they took their training a lot more seriously. Cuz well that’s how people fought back then. Kung fu might have been a lot different if guns were invented 300 years sooner or so… But to say that they were deadly perfected killers is just as much an exaggeration as to say they were all divine beings that could float on clouds and played flutes all day. They were human. Skinny, fat, tall, short…they got happy, mad, jelous, apathetic just like the rest of us. Not to debunk anyones faith in the art or anything. If anything I would hope it refocuses you. Those guys got so good but yet they were just human. There is no reason why with the same effort anyone here couldn’t be just as good. If anything people now days have more time to train. No one I know is waking up at 4:00 am to milk a cow and plant rice. People have a lot of excuses not to train now days. But work, kids, bills…these aren’t new things, people 400 years ago had the same problems. And hey you aren’t going to be hanged for bouncing a check
Anyways, what were we talking about? Oh yeah, what’s USSD?
[QUOTE=tattooedmonk;763345]Aside from all the other BS, what does the uniform or belt system have to do with determining whether or not you do kung fu or karate or Shaolin or not?? many socalled TCMA schools have adopted belt / sash ranking systems, how does this make them any less traditional or authentic??
By the way most Japanese Karate comes from China. The original ideogram for Karate meant “china hand”.[/QUOTE]
Well to be honest with you the uniform or belt doesn’t determine what "style
you study. I just think it’s rather comical to read about the “2nd degree black belt in shaolin kung fu”…especially when emphasis is placed on something that is totally useless in itself…lets say like a belt. Yeah Karate has roots from China but if you dissect karate from kung fu the fighting styles are totally different. Just because something originated from China doesn’t necessarily mean “shaolin” should be painted all over it.
Right again, most people do not know what CMA or kung fu is. Reading from your comment, I think somewhere along your studies you have been mis informed. Not doubting your experiences/studies but to say you study shaolin / wudang is sort of a contradiction in itself. The “flowery stuff” you are referring to is called wushu, chang quan, long fist…etc. and is not necessarily shaolin kung fu. There are differences but a bit of research from the internet can provide the details rather than turn this into another shaoln wushu debate. Oh yeah before I forget dont wander into a fight thinking shaolin is a form of exercise and performance art and has no true practical applications…you may end up having your rear end handed to you in a fight…most likely from a shaolin guy or a wushu guy.
Let me try and clarify what I was trying to say. Often when the question “how does this or that make a style or art any less traditional or authentic?” makes me think where did tradition go in the martial arts? So often you read post after post from people who feel the need to learn martial arts to “incapacitate someone”, extreme self defense or say to prove who has the best fighting style. Yes, martial arts was originated for fighting/combat purposes but to me that is barely the surface of martial arts. Martial arts has deeper roots with deeper meaning. People learn martial arts for many reasons not just fighting. Some do for health (Qi gong) and some even do for sports performance. Whether it be uniforms, lion dance teams, terminology, etc. they are all part of tradtion and culture. When you neglect traditions and culture for the almighty dollar you begin altering a particular style’s tradition. That is why in my opinion I do not agree with the mixing of styles. Yeah sure the “ground and pound” is brutal, sells tickets, fighters make money but is that really martial arts?
[QUOTE=tattooedmonk;763351]Shaolin and Kung fu are based on philosophy, basic stance trainig and practical application, and not whether you use english , japanese or chinese terminology or whether you have belts , gis , lion dances or specific forms, all this simple does not matter does not matter.
Get a clue people and start living in reality.
Personallly I think that people should stop refering to CMA as Kung Fu because even if you practice another martial art and have put time and effort or hard work you still essentially practice Kung Fu.[/QUOTE]
In case you missed it…
Often when the question “how does this or that make a style or art any less traditional or authentic?” makes me think where did tradition go in the martial arts? So often you read post after post from people who feel the need to learn martial arts to “incapacitate someone”, extreme self defense or say to prove who has the best fighting style. Yes, martial arts was originated for fighting/combat purposes but to me that is barely the surface of martial arts. Martial arts has deeper roots with deeper meaning. People learn martial arts for many reasons not just fighting. Some do for health (Qi gong) and some even do for sports performance. Whether it be uniforms, lion dance teams, terminology, etc. they are all part of tradtion and culture. When you neglect traditions and culture for the almighty dollar you begin altering a particular style’s tradition. That is why in my opinion I do not agree with the mixing of styles. Yeah sure the “ground and pound” is brutal, sells tickets, fighters make money but is that really martial arts?
It may not mean anything to you but it may for others. Lets fast forward to the future. When you get old (and you will) and reach an “elder status” in life will you be still looking for that “fighters edge” in martial arts or will you be one of those that hangs up the martial arts? Sometimes you have to think of the future not just the present. That is reality.
let me also add, “The flowery” innefective stuff? Have you ever asked yourself, if you were putting together techniques to pass down to save a human life on the battlefield, or wherever, where life and death hang in the balance, would you include “flowery, innefective movements” or movement for movement sake? Highly doubtful. Granted, there are styles that have devolved over time to include acrobatic opera movements, but these are few and far between. Simply put, it means that most people do not understand the movements and applications. It has been my experience, that the movements that appear to be the most “flowery and inneffective” end up being the most brutal.
Just for fun, perform the following movements in the air; an imagined defense against a right lead-
step in at a 45 angle,deflect the incomming attack with your left,and strike with your right to the face/eyes with an open palm/claw,immediately following with a left knifedge strike to the throat,which rips up over the face,grabbing the back of the head while the right chop/grabs the throat. or jaw. Snap the head back and then twist counterclockwise and down towards the ground. On an opponent, this is a fairly brutal, yet common movement seen in many systems-when “performed” in the air,in one continuous movement, it is quite beautiful-dainty almost. it is one application of twin butterfly palms. Very basic, and not considered a “higher level skill” but simply an example.
In SPM, the skill,“Flower hands” is a higher level skill, and has only been passed down to a select few. The little I have seen is far more subtle, and much more brutal.
just mty .02
[QUOTE=TenTigers;763262]-you should’ve stayed with Ralph Castro-he trained directly with Chow, alongside Ed Parker. You would’ve had something real.[/QUOTE]
Yep. Unfortunately I moved to SoCal. There weren’t any Castro schools there. He was not big on expansion. I did find a Kajukenbo school taught by Master Forbach, but at the time I was oblivious to its lineage. All I was able to find was Villari, which later became USSD.
And Master Ralph Castro does call his system Shaolin Kenpo (Shaolin Chuan Fa). One thing that was a bit difficult was all of the defensive techniques had actual names like “tiger walk the river” as oppose to USSD/Villari’s numbered “kenpos” I kinda liked the simplified numbered system.