JKD and self expression

Discussion in 'Jeet Kune Do' started by Edgeorge, Aug 27, 2010.

  1. ap Oweyn

    ap Oweyn Ret. Supporter

    I don't think it's really that complicated. You have various factors in a physical altercation. For the sake of this conversation, we'll abstract them down to three: 1) Level of contact. 2) Range of techniques. 3) Allowable targets.

    Assuming that a full-out fight is defined as one featuring full contact, anything goes, and any target is fair game. Agreed?

    Boxing: Full contact. Punching. No targets below the waist.
    Lethwei: Full contact. Punching, kicking, knees, elbows. No groin or eye shots.
    MMA: Full contact. Punching, kicking, knees, elbows, throws, takedowns, etc. Limitations on targets consistent with other ring sports.

    So...

    MMA features more variables (albeit not all of them) present in an actual fight.

    Now the question becomes, "are any of the limitations present in this format also present in your classroom training?" Unless you're kicking the crap out of each other in groups with real weapons and no protective gear, then yes, they are.

    As I've said, training has rules. It's all well and good saying that the real thing has no rules. But for many of us, our direct experience (i.e., training) DOES.
     
  2. february

    february Valued Member

    Browneagle:

    Thanks for the response mate.

    Pat and AP:

    Spot on comments. Absolutely sums the whole thing up.


    I really don't think there's much mileage left in this debate tbh. This is one of the things that falls into the "cult of the sifu" category. No one person is the "real" JKD gatekeeper. It's far too easy to latch on to the experience and "truth" of another person than it is to walk your own path. I think it's great that people are honouring Bruce's legacy, however it's far braver (and infinitely more rewarding) to walk your own path and come to your own conclusions. The only person you really need to be honest with is yourself.
     
  3. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    Ap and February. Bang on the money indeed and you guys are more JKD than those who claim to be the one true grandpoobah keeper of the secret thoughts.
     
  4. Doublejab

    Doublejab formally Snoop

    I had a look on wikipedia and, assuming its accurate, out of the three only Doug Evans ever fought for the UFC. Good fighter but he still went 1 (win) - 2 (losses) in the promotion so hardly a 'good winning record'. He was also much more of a grappler anyway, most of his MMA wins come by way of submission.

    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkPmwV_Fr5g"]YouTube - Wan Chai vs Doug Evans - Lethwei fight[/ame] Assuming this is the same Doug Evans, and he doesn't look much like the fighter I know who fought Hueta in the UFC but hey ho, look what happens at 2 minutes in. Look where he ends up after the knee? Now in an MMA fight, OR in a street fight, with their respective skill levels on the ground, the lethwei boxer could very well be done. Do you see why so many of us make the point that MMA athletes train a skill set thats very very hard to beat in terms of 'reality'?

    Takedown defence, getting up off your back, chokes, triangles, armbars, kneebars, takedowns, little gloves, clinching etc etc. A few reasons why its closer to reality :)
     
  5. Doublejab

    Doublejab formally Snoop

  6. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    Funny how different people have the same names. You see even though I was involved in the Vale Tudo scene here in the UK there is a Pat OMalley who has whom some major MMA fight in the USA but it ain't me does that mean my Arnis is better than MMA???

    Best regards

    Pat
     
  7. Browneagle

    Browneagle Valued Member

    Guys thanks for your input and advise. Snoop Thanks for correcting wikipedia on the Lethei stuff I agree wikipedia does get its knickers in the twist. I enjoyed watching the fight. I guess I used a fictitious example to support an obviouse argument. I still dont know why everybody here is trying their best to convince me no style is better than any other. In what context?

    the variables in MMA I find absolutley irrelevant. If One may choose to spread themselves thinner (than they actually will otherwise) with their skills doesn't make them better prepared for reality. MMA has different levels from local amatuer to world class pros. The same can apply in the streets only I'm not aware of any ranking. If a JKD or any self defence based art is focused on getting ones skill level to exactly what is necessary, whoever gains the skills is able to put the opposition where they want them to be in no matter a varied the oppositions skills are. Now The opposite could work the same too. meaning a good MMA fighter can put the other guy in the distance and range he wants to be. But that isn't that were awareness of range comes into it? How is one going to enter the grappling range with you when you have knocked them out???

    between

    a) becoming best you could be at putting you opponent in a position to give them a shoot tackle/take down ( that wouldn't stand an otherwise illegal elbow to the back of the neck) grappling with them maybe managing to get a gillotine or choke them on a floor no way as soft and cushty as you might compete in.
    b) Becoming best you could be at timing your reflexes and gaining the perfect distance to break your opponents knee prior to knocking him out before he can even enter that range
    Its clear which one is more Simple and direct and economic ...... B
    learning to be simple is not easy takes a lot of effort and time. But with the example shown above in my opinion its most definitly the more appropriate thing to spend time on.

    Oh the Combat Ki stuff was cool too. I'm surprised the Kickboxer didn't break the guys pubic bone though! I hope that wasn't an attempt to talk me out of going for the balls or throat if I had to. I would imagine that %99 of people would rather bang their heads to the wall all day than go through that training :bang:
     
  8. Browneagle

    Browneagle Valued Member

    Oh and Eric Paulson has taken lessons for Tim Tackett. One of their observations were how a knee break using an active stop kick cannot work in the ring because often except for times in the M1 you compete barefoot and too risky. Tim has worked with various MMA stars including shamrock bros. He is well aware of what works in the ring and not outside and vice versa. My point being the same skill set required is a bit different. though can be complimentary.
     
  9. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    Not all MMA fighters are grapplers some know how to grapple because the need to but choose to stay stand up and use hands and feet.

    Who would you rather fight someone with a vast experience in the ring that is use to going all out all be it in limited environment or someone who does some
    Sparring occasionally down the local MA club but claims to do street fighting. I know who I would choose to have any easier fight with but if I had to fight the other guy gimmi my knife and that is a great equaliser regardless.

    MMA is a sport granted but the tools it gives you for real encounters is top notch.

    You can't really criticise something unless of course you are experienced in it can you on the same way you can't really tell people your way is the best unless you can 100% prove it physically.

    Best regards

    Pat
     
  10. Gripfighter

    Gripfighter Sub Seeker

    yeah when he said a way of honestly expressing yourself he probably meant a way of honestly testing your limits, maybe something just got lost in translation. Although ap oweyns reply is the best iv seen he could have meant a number of those things or all of them at once, all are pretty valid
     
  11. Browneagle

    Browneagle Valued Member

    Oh I'm well aware of that and indeed see the bonus in training that way from a street perspective. It helps one become accustomed to different angles of attack.

    My example was trying to display that the variance argument does not necessarily apply. The same 2 MMA fighters may fight differently in the octagon than they will in a dark corner in the street with gutters. Or on a staircase landing. Or where there's barbed wires. Or on the NY subway train. Those are "varients" in the street.

    The other point is that the training approach in my B example will have a longer shelf life. We want to be able to fight when we are old and grey too after all. So the bottom question one should ask in JKD is what should I be investing my time in.
     
  12. Dizzyj

    Dizzyj Valued Member

    That doesn't appear to be what everyone is arguing. What they are arguing is that the criteria for an effective fighting style/technique is how effective that fighter finds it, not how well it fits into a preordained framework from upon high. Are you really arguing the opposite, that a fighter should use a technique which has empirically been worse for them in sparring and pressure testing just because it is what the style says they should do?

    This is why it is claimed that JKD isn't a style. Because by design (I am told, I don't have personal experience) it is meant to allow for fighters using what gets them the best results.
     
  13. Stevie Bhoy

    Stevie Bhoy Valued Member

    Expressing oneself in JKD obviously has a different meaning to each individual. For example, in a confrontation, one practitioner may use the straight lead whereas another practitioner in the same confrontation may use a sidekick & another practitioner, a hook kick. That to me is self-expression within JKD as long as the techniques used are simple, direct & used with economy of motion.

    Two examples I had previously stated, where ‘a kick in the balls’ & ‘a poke in the eye’. Reason being, the average person on the street will not be conditioned to be able to absorb both these tactics when carried out effectively. Kudos to those Combat Ki guys, they must have endured serious pain to get to where they are now but if hit in the same places when surprised, would they be able to still withstand? I would say the person brave enough to get hit by the tennis ball reiterates my point (look how he crumpled to the floor).

    Obviously it is all down to circumstances & training (of which I admit I have been guilty of neglecting of late) through constant repetition & also within a pressurised environment in order to pull off techniques such as the above examples, using awareness, timing, etc in a confrontation.

    No doubt, people on here will disagree but that is what makes for healthy discussions ;)
     
  14. Browneagle

    Browneagle Valued Member

    what I am argueing is THAT doesn't stop it from being a "style".
    That is the reason there are Styles, sub-styles and super-substyles e.g shuri-te, shorin ryu, Kobayashi, shobayashi, matsubayashi of what is grouped as "Kara-te" despite many similar things being taught in southern Kung-fu, some Kuntaw-silat or even arguably sikaran etc etc

    Any successful MMArtist has got where they got by finding a structure that makes his elements work together
    But that's his MMA not necessarily JKD

    JKD has specific priorities (self defence) geared to specific goals (Down your opponenet before they even get to touch you) using a specific process (try and find a quicker way to do it every day) To do this you need to believe in Junfan JKD and Practice a technique endlessly before you can suggest it doesn't work and choose a different method. But there are different methods to choose from just from the different Eras of his school. Seattle, Oaklnd, LA and if it doesn't find out honestly why? There is only so many reasons something can work for one homosapien and not another and a lot of time it's not what you do but how you do it.

    Bruce worked differently with every student and that is reflected in what they teach, but in my opinion if we claim to study JKD then we should be studying what he did first. The path you choose to follow after that and how you express yourself is your choice. So if I was asked what martial arts do I study and I'm learning JKD and Tai'chi. I personally don't say I'm learning JKD. I say I'm learning JKD and Tai'chi.

    It is a Style of "no-style"
    Bruce said
    "Therefore, any attempt to define Jeet Kune Do in terms of a distinct style… is to completely miss its meaning.” that is one reason we have people suggesting it's not a style. A well respected JKD instructor stated and I agree... "But the word that many of these people tend to neglect, and which is vitally important, is the word “distinct”."
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2011
  15. february

    february Valued Member

    Oh man, like I said there really is no more mileage left int this debate. That's it. The tank is empty folks.

    Nobody here is ever going to make a case for JKD is, is not, should be, or shouldn't be. What is evident in this day and age is the wealth of options and outlets people have to test their theories and skills. Plenty of competitive outlets. Hell, even the likes of Youtube allow you to share and demonstrate visually the points you're trying to make. So, folks can sit and hypothesise and put forward all the theories they want, but it doesn't amount to much. The points that people are making about MMA as an effective framework, the benefits of discovering what works and what doesn't for YOU, are all tried and tested, the results of which are freely out there (e.g. in competitive venues like MMA).

    The case that the strong side forward straight lead based framework (which incidentally I believe can be an effective STRATEGY as part of a wider outlook), is the be all and end all - well stick something up on Youtube and post it here where it can be effectively critiqued.

    As to what Bruce Lee would want JKD to be or not be - I think we as grown folks should be way, way past that argument by now.
     
  16. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    The problem I have with some JKD concepts is that they tend to abstract people too much.
    Nearest weapon to nearest target for example. Damn good concept of course.
    But people are not automata.
    People can sometimes be hit with a more obscure weapon that utilises psychology, a line up etc rather than a weapon that corresponds to an abstract concept.
    In some instances a close weapon can actually provoke a flinch response that stops it working.
    Whereas a slower or more distant technique that comes from outside peripheral vision or is disguised in some other way may land with more ease.

    I personally think Bruce could have learnt a bit more from experienced street fighters that may not be efficient in the JKD sense but were effective in the reality sense.
    I also know he would have embraced MMA fully and learnt from it as much as he could.
     
  17. Simplicity

    Simplicity Valued Member

    It always freaks me out when "people say" what Bruce Lee would have wanted... (o_0)
     
  18. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    I think Bruce Lee would have wanted people to stop riding his coat tails and learn their own truth.
    I'm sure he said something to that effect once or twice?
     
  19. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    When your old and grey and leaning on your walking stick for support what lead your in won't really matter best take up FMA and the you have an excuse to walk around with a big stick ;)
     
  20. Browneagle

    Browneagle Valued Member

    What you are saying here has all been addressed in the methods of exectution of the backfist, straight lead from the blind spot, hammer principal, non telegraghy, simple angular attack, shifts and the Progressive indirect ways of attack. Inner and outer circles.
    Also I am not JKD "concepts". JKD concepts resembles MMA in practice. I don't believe in the word. JKD is JKD
    No one knows where martial arts would be if Bruce was still alive MMA might have advanced much more or he would have found it too egocentric of a thing to associate with Nartial arts. who knows? He might be only allowing his stuff to be taught to a group of 12 people like he did back then.
    All we can do is see if an instructor is teaching his principals of directness that makes sense and gets results whilst evaluating your individuality, and if not move on and find one that does. I don't know what makes you think Bruce did not have street fighting experience and worked with other street fighters?
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2011

Share This Page