JKD Should be practiced after having established a strong foundation..? Discuss

Discussion in 'Jeet Kune Do' started by Jabby Mcgee, Mar 8, 2011.

  1. Master Betty

    Master Betty Banned Banned

    Yes I agree, clinching is like trapping, and parrying a jab is technically trapping. But too many places Ive seen, and indeed too many videos on youtube Ive seen, show JKD people spending more time on pak sao than they do parrying boxing or clinching.
  2. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    That much is true - but your average street punk is easie to trap against having said that!

    If I can find it I will post Vu's article on what he classes contemporary JKD ( or "Filhy MMA"). I think you will find there is a lot you can dig as it is principally Muay Thai, Jits & Kali with a little Chun spice!
  3. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    Well I think you should spell it out after all it is you who has clearly stated JKD Concepts is something different. So explain. And what makes you think in my 30 or so years of training JKD that I have not read books on it? I think after 30 years I have a dam good idea what JKD is and not matter how many books you read that won't make you an expert on the subject.

    I have been there and I have most certainly done the training. So please rather than avoiding the answer we are waiting for, in your readers expert opinion why is JKD Concepts something else?

    Best regards

    Last edited: Mar 24, 2011
  4. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    And Bluedragon. To validate your claim let's us know how long you have been training JKD and with whom.

    Best regards

  5. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    Hello? Bluedragon...are you there? Hello?

  6. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    *quiet constant whistle* *tumbleweed rolls past*
  7. mranderson

    mranderson Valued Member

    I'm not an "expert" like PAT is. BUT I've read bruce lees notes, taO AND commentaries. i would say that the idea behind the concepts group is that you can take the philosophy of JKD ( economy of motion) and plug the arts/techniques of YOUR choice. the JKD original group ( of which i am a member) obviously follow the philosophy, but ALSO preserve and try to master the system of techniques and strategies as taught by bruce lee. one group follows THEIR OWN interpretation of what JKD is in terms of techniqies and fightings methods/strategies., the other group follows BRUCE LEES interpretation in all of these areas.

    I just dont see how you can use escrima stickfighting and call that JKD. I will never agree with the "concepts" guys. do you guys really think you can intrepret JKD better than the FOUNDER of the art? thats how i view JKD concepts. bruce lees art is plain to see and yet people do BJJ and call it jkd? they do kali and call it JKD. all wrong IMO.
  8. mranderson

    mranderson Valued Member

    Oh and i dont see why JKD cant be your first MA. oftentimes new MAists feel the need to "know" a lot of techniques (i can relate). SO JKD may not appeal to all MA noobs. too bad though.
  9. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    After his death, his students took "his" hypotheses, "his" postulates, "his" method and turned them into law. Impressive creeds were then invented, solemn reinforcing ceremonies prescribed, rigid philosophy and patterns formulated, and so on, until finally an institution was erected.

    What originated as one man's intuition of some sort of personal fluidity has been transformed into solidified, fixed knowledge, complete with organized classified responses presented in a logical order. In so doing, the well-meaning, loyal followers have not only made this knowledge a holy shrine, but also a tomb in which they have buried the founder's wisdom.
  10. mranderson

    mranderson Valued Member

    you could say this about ANY martial art. BL never really passed the torch.bruce died unexpectantly, obviously. there are many former students of his claiming the mantle. but i go with the student who logged the most hours of training with bruce PRIVATELY. TED WONG and his lineage. ofcourse JKD is an institution, it was meant to be, JKD is about what actually works and nothing else. there should be a pattern, without a pattern what you have is "concepts". i think people forget that BL was a philospohy major, keep that in mind, when you read his notes. JKD is a martial art and is fixed as such. learning and improving is never fixed. and if training in an alive manner using effective techniques and proven fighting strategies is rigid then I'll be rigid. how does studying a HIGHLY effective martial art bury the founders wisdom?
  11. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Valued Member

    in much the same way in that I can't see how you can strictly limit yourself to only the Jun Fan material Bruce taught and call yourself JKD. By placing boundaries and limiting your learning and knowledge you go against everything that makes up the backbone of JKD.

    Just because someone has a different interpretation and view does not mean it is not JKD either and surely applying efficient and effective technique is the whole crux of JKD anyway.

    Me personally I'm neither original or concepts for the simple reason original are too busy of trying to preserve Brucea teaching to the letter instead of doing what was asked of he 'to find your own way' and thus limiting themselves. And I am not concepts as a
    Concept is an idea that has not need tried and tested yet, an idea, a thought, a theory. I much prefer tried and tested principles.

    Is either camp wrong. No. They both have their own way of doing things.

    Best regards

  12. Doublejab

    Doublejab formally Snoop

    Yes you could, I believe Bruce did for example.
  13. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    So you disagree with what I wrote then?

    Ironic - and the sad thing is you cannot see the irony. Now why would I be shaking my head at your disagreement with the words I typed?

    What a suprise you are from the TW line. Answer me this - where (or more specifically who) did Ted receive his certificate to teach from?

    And who did Linda acknowledge as the individual with the best understanding and interpretation of JKD after Sijo Bruce died?

    Sorry to break this to you but we "concepts" guys DO use JKD (or more specifically JFGF) and it is contained and preserved within our curriculum. This is out of tribute to Sijo and in recognition of how useful it actually is. The big difference is we do not blindly adhere to it. It is a wonderful art but is far from complete. We add what is useful for us and reject what is useless. I know, I know...if Bruce had wanted us to research arts and experiences he would have written something like that down for us.

    Hang on a sec.....
  14. mranderson

    mranderson Valued Member

    actually being both (concepts,original) makes sense. JKD is a crystalized martial art syle. straight lead, strong side upfront, footwork, economy of motion, very few actual techniques, aliveness. these are some of the JKD specific unique principles that define the art and crystalize it. ALL martial arts are crystalized, but JKD has very specific principles that define it. the point isn't wether people should study different arts and learn. thats not my point. MY POINT is that JKD IS an actual martial art style that is unique. follwing BL teaching to the letter is not limiting, its called studying a martial art!!!!! if you want more study another art. no martial art is complete.

    i can see why people study FMA, and a grappling art to go along with JKD. it covers every range and weapons. i would too if i had more hours in the day and didn't have to sleep!!!! but FMA AND GRAPPLING is not JKD. thats it.
  15. mranderson

    mranderson Valued Member

    well maybe the issue here is that I'm saying JKD is a martial art style that IS and should be crystalized and that studying other styles (FMA, judo,BJJ) and calling it JKD is incorrect. thats my point. there is NO complete martial art, NOBODY on the "original" side says that JKD is complete. there is NO GRAPPLING or weapons training so its not complete. but it is a no nonsense striking art that can be used at real speed against somebody really trying to hit you. otherwise i wouldn't bother with it.

    many arts are very questionable in a live situation( karate blocks, kung fu crazy stances) JKD is ALL Realistic, which helps make it very special. BL formulate a martial art that you can use in any confrontation. very unique. you know that. many Martial Arts are for show only IMO.

    seems to me that there is not as much of an argument here as it seemed. do you agree with first sentence of my reply here?
  16. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    I believe we have a concord in principle

    However, you out and out stated that JKDC (a term I do not agree with BTW) was NOT JKD...this is patently untrue.

    What you appear to be referring to when you say JKD is what is commonly known as Jun Fan JKD. That is certainly a style- Jun Fan I mean. But JKD is NOT a style...it is a process. A bit like when people call "science" a doctrine when in essence it is a methodology.

    Or to put it in context, show me the difference between Jun Fan and JKD as you perceive it.

    However what I mean when i use the term is MY JKD...which comes from the "concepts" lineage and so reflects that base.

    Sijo taught many people different things - Bremer was a big, burly guy so Bruce taught him to "crash"; Wong was slight so he was taught evasiveness. Yet both teach JKD as THEY know it. Ultimately that is all anyone can really do.

    The problem was your initial post was polemical and stated that what I do is just wrong - I included my response in specific words for a VERY specific reason - have you seen that reason yet?
  17. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    This is reiterated because it again shows the point I make in that those arts ARE JKD - they are just not Jun Fan
  18. mranderson

    mranderson Valued Member

    there is no other argument like this with any martial art. do TKD practioners from the wtf, itf and ATA argue about which is the authenic TKD? they argue about which is the BETTER TKD. all agree that each group practices TKD. its hard for ME to accept that kali,escrima, grappling and EVEN WING CHUN are even a part of original or as junfanJKD considering that these arts are either not mentioned at all or barely mentioned in BL notes.(TAO,commentaries). clearly his focus was elsewhere.

    BL should of spoke in laymens terms more, zen buddhism CAN be confusing, and philosohy is always open for intrepretation. but if i thought OJKD was impractical, i wouldn't waste my time. my interest in BL art is only sustained because IT WORKS> if it didnt i would move on. I'm no fanboy. I'm a jet li fan too but i know wushu/kung fu is mostly movie smoke.
  19. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    Effectiveness is not the issue and never has been. It is the denial of the authenticity of one approach over the other where the split occurs.
  20. mranderson

    mranderson Valued Member

    I'm responding to your last paragraph here. what does blindly adhere mean here? only a 13 year old kid could "blindly" adhere to BL!!! no adult does that man, not jerry poteet students nor ted wong students. NONE OF THEM. none of them have ever said that JKD is complete. take what is useful reject what isn't is classic. IF a tornado kick is useful in fighting to me haha, would that be JKD in your opinion?

Share This Page