More Tracy Forms - where did they come from?

[KenpoDave]

No the writings is a compilation of Sifu Woos private notes and “writings“ is what we decided to call it. It is not available, it’s something we made and only a few copies exist. The Sifu book is just short cursory. A lot of the content in Secrets of Chinese karate is actually Sifu Woo and not E.P.

Thanks. I knew about the Secrets of Chinese Karate stuff.

 

[KenpoDave]

I’m curious what your book set looks like. Is it the same as Sifu Ibrao? Bun gi Kuen

Ted Sumner showed it to James Wing Woo with a compilation of several people doing it. Apparently GM Woo singled me out and complimented my understanding of power and structure. That was cool to hear.

I filmed it about 20 years ago, but here is a link:

 

[Wing Woo Gar42]

Ted Sumner showed it to James Wing Woo with a compilation of several people doing it. Apparently GM Woo singled me out and complimented my understanding of power and structure. That was cool to hear.

I filmed it about 20 years ago, but here is a link:

Wow very nice! If he complimented you on anything ever, you must truly be something special. Sifu Woo was not known for compliments. Your skill shows. Did you ever practice it on his floor? The main training tool was the cotton soled slippers on the slippery waxed floor. It can take the fire right out of a guy.

 

[Wing Woo Gar42]

Thanks. I knew about the Secrets of Chinese Karate stuff.

This is interesting. So apparently only Tracy Kenpo acknowledges Sifu Woo.

 

[KenpoDave]

Wow very nice! If he complimented you on anything ever, you must truly be something special. Sifu Woo was not known for compliments. Your skill shows. Did you ever practice it on his floor? The main training tool was the cotton soled slippers on the slippery waxed floor. It can take the fire right out of a guy.

I never met Sifu Woo. All he ever knew of me was that video.

 

[KenpoDave]

This is interesting. So apparently only Tracy Kenpo acknowledges Sifu Woo.

That is possible. Some of Ed Parker’s old timers used to talk about him, but Parker dropped most of what Sifu Woo was doing when he split ways with him.

 

[Flying Crane]

This is interesting. So apparently only Tracy Kenpo acknowledges Sifu Woo.

In the time I spent training in the Tracy lineage, among the people I worked with, Sifu Woo was always held in a position of respect as a contributor to Ed Parker’s earlier rendition of his system. Al Tracy had some articles about Sifu Woo’s involvement in the development of Parker’s kenpo, on his website. When the Tracy brothers split from Parker, they kept the older system and did not update as Parker continued to change things. This probably gave them reason to continue to recognize Sifu Woo’s contributions.

I do not recall anyone from the later Parker-derived lineages expressing disrespect for Sifu Woo, but my only interaction with them has pretty much been through the Internet forums. It seems to me that Sifu Woo simply does not get mentioned in those circles. Having trained in the later iterations of Mr. Parker’s system, they might be unaware of Sifu Woo’s contributions, as they were mostly edited out as the system continued to be changed by Mr. Parker.

 

[Wing Woo Gar42]

In the time I spent training in the Tracy lineage, among the people I worked with, Sifu Woo was always held in a position of respect as a contributor to Ed Parker’s earlier rendition of his system. Al Tracy had some articles about Sifu Woo’s involvement in the development of Parker’s kenpo, on his website. When the Tracy brothers split from Parker, they kept the older system and did not update as Parker continued to change things. This probably gave them reason to continue to recognize Sifu Woo’s contributions.

I do not recall anyone from the later Parker-derived lineages expressing disrespect for Sifu Woo, but my only interaction with them has pretty much been through the Internet forums. It seems to me that Sifu Woo simply does not get mentioned in those circles. Having trained in the later iterations of Mr. Parker’s system, they might be unaware of Sifu Woo’s contributions, as they were mostly edited out as the system continued to be changed by Mr. Parker.

Thats good info. Thank you. In any case Mr Hopper has very nice form. Do you know that form also?

 

[Flying Crane]

Thats good info. Thank you. In any case Mr Hopper has very nice form. Do you know that form also?

I did, but have forgotten it as I stopped training Tracy kenpo at all in about 2011 or so. I came to recognize that kenpo as a whole was not a good match for me and I made a pretty much exclusive focus on Tibetan crane from that time forward, not counting my recent foray into aikido.

My concern with the Chinese material that Tracy kenpo adopted into its curriculum is that the foundational training method of kenpo may not be consistent with the foundations of the Chinese methods upon which that Chinese material is built. When that is the case, practice of those forms can lose much of its original integrity and the benefits of the practice drops off. So I stopped practicing all of it, to focus on Tibetan crane and the foundational methods that I was coming to understand better, that is built into the entire methodology.

 

[Wing Woo Gar42]

I did, but have forgotten it as I stopped training Tracy kenpo at all in about 2011 or so. I came to recognize that kenpo as a whole was not a good match for me and I made a pretty much exclusive focus on Tibetan crane from that time forward, not counting my recent foray into aikido.

My concern with the Chinese material that Tracy kenpo adopted into its curriculum is that the foundational training method of kenpo may not be consistent with the foundations of the Chinese methods upon which that Chinese material is built. When that is the case, practice of those forms can lose much of its original integrity and the benefits of the practice drops off. So I stopped practicing all of it, to focus on Tibetan crane and the foundational methods that I was coming to understand better, that is built into the entire methodology.

A valid point. Particularly in regard to Sifu Woos system where the foundational exercises are FAR more important than the forms or individual techniques.

 

[Flying Crane]

A valid point. Particularly in regard to Sifu Woos system where the foundational exercises are FAR more important than the forms or individual techniques.

That is also my experience with Tibetan crane. I spend much more time on foundational material and drills than I do on the forms.

I believe that adopting material from one system into another is often fraught with peril. If the foundations of the two systems are too different, the material may be incompatible, or at least will go through dramatic changes in order to fit within its new home and quite possibly losing much of its value as a training tool in that process. It could be akin to cramming a square peg into a round hole. Yes, it fits…kinda sorta. I have always suspected the Chinese material within Tracy’s may fit that description, and the Tibetan crane example solidified for me as a point of comparison.

People tend to want to add to what they are doing, and not subtract. That is not always the best answer. People see something that someone else is doing and they see how valuable it is, but never consider the context. If that thing (a form, as example) is put into another context (a different system with a different foundation, for example), it may become worthless clutter because it was designed to work on the original foundation. It takes careful thought and a solid understanding of both systems to intelligently blend them. Simply grabbing material from various sources is not always a good idea.

 

[isshinryuronin1]

Simply grabbing material from various sources is not always a good idea.

Your post is well put. It takes someone who is expert in all those various sources to make proper decisions on if, what and how to combine. Putting a saltwater fish into fresh water does not go well much of the time.

I believe that adopting material from one system into another is often fraught with peril. If the foundations of the two systems are too different, the material may be incompatible, or at least will go through dramatic changes in order to fit within its new home and quite possibly losing much of its value as a training tool in that process.

I agree. In the case of EPKK there is some Chinese influence in the black belt levels, but in application it is hard to see. Perhaps Parker saw that the CMA fundamentals were at odds with his Kenpo's biomechanics which more resemble old Okinawan style karate (with some of his refinements) and so he minimized some of the Chinese aspects. The competition practicalities may have played a part in this as well.

 

[gyoja]

I learned a lot from this thread. Many thank you’s to all.