Well put! either way you look at it, the underlying point is that techniques must be worked in the right application and under stress, not just the mechanics, for it them to work in a ring or in a SD scenario.
We all need to thats my whole point. Only then you will realise the importance of practicing the mechanics of something thousands of times (much more than 5000) for it to be second nature within application, sport or stress. If you are going to use the words "Science" and "Bruce" in the same sentence then try and actually demonstrate you have an understanding of both. You are not in a position to prove or disprove something unless you have actually acquired it. The straight lead is one of those things that is very difficult to acquire hence the need for repitition. Once aquired its actually just as difficult to maintain hence the need for even more repitition. To practice 20 and then get in the ring is like saying I practice 20 american football passes and then I'll go and play quarter back to see if my pass works. Or I'll throw 20 shots and then start shooting from the 3 point line in with defence on me to see if it works. Legendary sports men like Larry bird still spend hours on just one portion of their shot and always self criticising themselves even though they were already competing at the highest level. that's how they became great. that is the only way you can prove or disprove what bruce was trying to achieve. Also Science has actually proved bruce correct in more ways too. The whole idea of working on your strong side first and THEN working on your weakside to improve your strong side through nuero muscular symmetry has been showing convincing data.
No its not, it is an easy thing to get the hang off and an easy thing to practice. Regardless of whether any technique is hard or easy to get is immaterial and personally I dont think any technique is hard to aquire then only person who makes it difficult is the individual themselves. But once you do get it so to speak, like any basic it has to be constantly practiced. You wont loose it, you may get rusty but you wont loose it. But constant practice makes it sharper. Saying the straight lead is difficult to aquire is like saying pulling the trigger of a gun is difficult. The easy bit is pulling the trigger, the difficult bit it actually hitting the target and thats what you practice.
The more I practice the lead the more I see room for improvements. People who have also been doing it for years and years are never content because they have realised to make the lead work to tis full potential its not enough to just "get the hang of it" That is the difference between you and an instructor who wants results with JKD. You are content with getting the "hang of things". Chances are You don't even get passed pulling the trigger bit much less hitting the target.
Then that also shows you know very little about me and you suffer from selective reading syndrome. What makes you think I am happy with jus getting the hang of something? If that was the case do you honestly think I would have been practicing the arts and more importantly my basics for over 30 years? Poppy ****. I know I have got more than the hang of it because I know it works and has worked for me on numerous occassions, in the arena, on the street and on the doors. Dont judge me by your standards, you dont know me that well.
What are you talking about? It's a punch. All straight punches share basic body mechanics. And what do you mean "make the lead work to it's full potential"? It's a freaking punch. I really don't understand all the borderline mysticism with this punch.
Excellent post. Bubba Watson has just won the world masters golf event. He has never had a golf lesson. Tiger Woods tweaks his swing constantly. Where did he finish? I think m1k3jobs has it spot on.
Oh, and by the way, pulling the trigger correctly is about 70% of hitting the target when shooting a rifle. I learned from some of the best.
I think Mharewood had stated that the "JKD Straight Lead" is done using the mechanics of a Fencing lunge. This makes the punch a very specific technique. In this context, it is not the same as a boxing jab (as the lunge type boxing jab is very rare and often is called something else anyway). However, the big issue is that "JKD" + "Straight" + "Lead" is not a term that must be used to define a single technique. "Lead" simply means what you attack with FIRST. "Straight" means that it is a straight technique (e.g. straight punch, not a hook punch). And "JKD" means... ??? Well that's a whole many discussions not just including this thread. Anyway, if right foot forward, a right lead could mean attack first with right hand. Right straight lead could be a boxing jab with the right hand. The whole rest of everything I don't really understand. Seems to me, once it was established that Mharewood was talking about a specific technique, e.g. "lead punch using fencing footwork", then I lost track of the conversation. This was what I picked up on at least.
Hannibal, you can correct me if I'm wrong since you have a fencing background, but I thought that in fencing attacking first (right of way) insured that you scored the point on a double hit. So you need to get the point of the sword moving forward before you moved your feet. In addition fencing is played on a strip so all the moving is back and forth and there is no circling. That is why the hand(point of the blade) moves first and the thrust is straight forward. Great for the rules of fencing but not necessarily a good method for fisticuffs especially when your opponent is circling you.
Ive been trying to develop the lead leg push/snap kick from Muay Thai for years,the better I get at it the more potential I see at using it,nowadays I can land it against most if not all other techniques in sparring with decent people,I think thats where M Hawood is coming from with the lead straight punch. Make every technique a masterpiece I belive the founder of JKD mentioned,if we have to many techniques its very hard to do that
I would love to post all the stuff that would indicate that Mharewood is wrong but im saving it for my essays and dont want to get caught on turnitin.
Gaining the attack is done by moving your hand first and not ceasing the forward movement of it, it doesn't require movement of the feet. That's why the movements are drilled in a particular order, hand starts, then feet and it finishes together. I've found it to be one of the most effective ways to cover ground, but I confess I don't know if it's because I drilled fencing footwork in detail for years, and have never had the same kind of training in FMA footwork. Anyway yeah, It's good for gaining ground, but I'm not convinced I see much of the fencing lunge in what I've seen of the JKD straight lead.
Weapon moves first even in unarmed combat. You move into position and align your body for attacking, and then you attack. From the point that the attack begins, the weapon moves first... any other movement is either to fool the opponent or alternatively is a telegraph of your intentions. Makes no difference if unarmed or armed. What is different is the compensators for power that need to be added. You might not need to add anything but the step and lean at the end of a lunge for a sword thrust, but if your barefisted punch is going to hurt your opponent, you might need to add in more hip/leg power, for example. Hence the sword lunge and the lunging punch are not exactly the same depending on the power compensators used. Also, you might be able to get away with a large attacking step to move far and generate force with a sword, but unarmed you are probably going to stick with shorter footwork which yields less power from the step. If you take away the lean, then you also lose range and power that you need to compensate for in other ways. In the end you get the same principles of speed and power generation, but you get hundreds of variations of the specific technique, each an adjustment from another. What you have left is just a punch, but one that is not done the same every time, even though it is to you the same... all the same, just adjustments. Also, when Bruce Lee wrote about attacking, IMHO, he did not dwell on simple attacks, but was into compound attacking. We cannot think then, that a straight lead was a single attack so easily countered by a circuling opponent. Probably, IMHO, Bruce was thinking parry and straight lead. So on the parry you are aligning your body to attack, and you counter with the straight lead. If you slipped rather than parry, both hands would be free, then perhaps the counter would be a hook lead rather than a straight lead.
and that agenda being "getting the straight lead to actually work like it was supposed to" as opposed to teaching different things every lesson to stop the students from getting bored and making them remember a whole syllabus of different material that don't matter a shift.
Bro! ...No Point in wasting your breath with him! You heard what he said ....”the JKD Straight Lead is like pulling the trigger”. So forget about all the non telegraphy, 3 point landing, hand before foot correct body alignment, snap of the wrist people spend years trying to get right. If you are up against a gunslinger cowboy in the wild wild west all you have to do is pull the trigger. I tell you what man that alone should tell you if he is doing a seminar on JKD stay as clear as you can from him....Or you might get shot by the ”rubbish JKD instruction “bullet. LOL
And you know I do that because...? Oh that's right - you don't. You have not trained with me or seen how I teach and are instead establishing a strawman to cover up the fact you have no cogency to your argument Thanks for clearing that up
yadda, yadda, yadda... No one has said do not train extensively No one has said do not continue to rpactice the basics No one has said the straight lead does not work What they HAVE said is that the JKD terminology for it is the only thing unique about it; everything else is found in other styles and applications. Why si that thsoe who profess to be "keeping things as Bruce wanted" are the ones that ignore the single most important lesson he gave us:
