Well said Tim i agree so much there does seem to be so much politics within JKD and like you say all have something to offer, some have variations, some have other martial arts thrown in not just JFJKD. I cant understand why there is so much "my JKD is better than yours" its like been in the play ground. i do an off shoot of JKD which is Keysi fighting method but its orogin came from JKD and have trained with Dan, this does not stop me seeking other instructors though so i hopfully i am gaining a greater understanding of martial arts, now i am relativly young (26) within the martail arts world and may get some of the more experiance people saying that it will change over time but i think no matter what age you should always be learning. For me martial arts is a passion and a way of life regards to everybody Pete
Personally I believe its the students and/or want a bee's, not JKD Instructor's from groups/era's that cause the Politic's BS :bang:
any instructor should only teach people in JEET KUNE DO if they have "Character", as Bruce Lee did......Then maybe we all wouldn't be having this problem in the first place, ya know!
well said tim and simpicity. the thing is, you will always look at it from the stand point of your instructor, or the line of the instructor
Thanks gbells. I agree with you Simplicity...being of good character is essential if you want to produce good students. I always talk to my guys about being loyal to those that teach you and they will be loyal to you. I believe what Sifu Larry says..."if everyone in the martial arts would just give credit as to where their stuff comes from then there would not be any hard feelings." In Peace my brothers Tim
Hit the nail on the HEAD. Dan teaches JKD concepts. JKD is not a fuse of mixed martial arts. Every style is a limitation, it has boundaries. What Bruce did was create a stance that was the most efficient form of street fighting, he broke it down to a science,thus his genius. It's sad that Bruce lee gets so discredited by JKD concept garbage , people who claim "it's your own path, you have to do what works best for yourself". Thats BS because if it was not efficient, Bruce would not have done it. You ARE NOT doing JKD unless you have your strong side foward, you work half beat foot work, and you understand the principles of the straight lead. Here are the 3 facets Bruce taught which are as follows: Non-Classical That is, there were and are no classical postures, no unrealistic footwork, no mechanical body movements, no dissection of movement (i.e., "first you do this, then you do this, and then you do this, " etc.) as if it were a corpse. Further, there are no two-man cooperation drills and no rhythmic forms. Instead, the art is "alive" and infused with broken rhythm. Directness There is no passive defense, blocking is considered the least efficient manner of defense. Everything in the art is stripped to its essential components with absolutely no fancy decoration or ornate movements (i.e., if someone grabs you, punch him!). Students are taught to see reality in its suchness and not deliberate about it. Simply experience it as it is, when it is. As if, when someone throws something to you, you catch it - you don't first grunt and go into a horse stance. And similarly, when someone grabs you, you hit him - you don't get involved in elaborate joint manipulations and complex maneuvering. Simplicity A daily minimize instead of a daily increase (being wise doesn't mean to "add" more, being wise means to be able to get off sophistication and be simply simple). 1. Sticking to the Nucleus 2. Liberation from the Nucleus 3. Returning to the Original Freedom There is a difference between FUNCTIONAL and EFFICIENCY.
WRONG!!! Dan spent time with Bruce, of course, but DAN DOES NOT TEACH WHAT BRUCE LEE TAUGHT!!! Ted Wong does, i just did a seminar with Ted Wong and there is nothing that Dan teaches that resembles anything that Bruce lee did at this point. Dan teaches mixed martial arts plain and simple. They are all partial truths. Every art has limitations...when all you need to do is understand motion. All humans move the same, but each art has it's own faults that negate each other. There is not one position that a grappler can put you in that you cant bite him or eye gauge him. Why block? What's the point? It's a wasted motion, if you can block you can hit, thats the whole point of JKD. IF YOU UNDERSTAND MOTION, YOU DONT NEED STYLE. Dan is destroying JKD. While Dan may be an extremely talented fighter, he is not doing what Bruce did. The Bruce Lee foundation does not care how long it takes to certify JKD instructors , even if it's only 5 in the next 10 years. Most other schools throw away cert. like it's candy.
You are a fool. Go read the TAO, or commentaries on the martial way, SHED SOME LIGHT FOR YOURSELF. Ted wong is the closest thing to Bruce. Bruce was a GENIUS for a reason. There is a reason why so many cultural martial artists hated him, because he stripped away the unessential and developed a fighting method that was the best BASED ON SCIENCE. Dan claims JKD's core is wing chun, which is utter BS. Bruce stopped teaching that towards the end of his life, and thats when JKD began to prosper. The footwork and stance Bruce taught emphasis the tools and creates the ultimate ability to use torque for power. Another reason he moved his hand first. Quicker, more power (energy goes forward , instead of down assuming you step first) harder to track, and again, more efficient. Threads like these are the reason i don't even bother reading martial arts forums. Last post from me on here, go read some books and educate yourself.
Is that why the foundation does not let Dan say he can teach JKD anymore? Ted Wong spent the most time with Bruce, more than Dan, or any other student. They spent HOURS every day in the "backyard". There is not one other person on the planet who spent more time with Bruce than Ted in regards to training. Ted does mostly footwork because without footwork, THERE IS NOTHING! ITS SIMPLICITY! Bruce's footwork was near perfection, and Ted understands that and thats why he teaches so much of it. It's an insult to say that Ted does not teach what Bruce taught, you obviously have no idea. Their training sessions lasted hours, Ted is undoubtedly Bruce's living apprentice.
Actually the reason he can not use the name anymore is because Harvest Moon bought the rights to the name and registered it. I have already spoken to the BL Foundation regarding this matter because of rumors and comments like the one you made. You say that Ted Wong spent more time training with Bruce than any other person and spent more time training privately with him than any other person...? How do you figure this...when Dan began training with him in 1964 and continued training with him until his death. Larry Hartsell trained with him at his school in L.A. as well as privately at his house in Belaire. Many times Ted Wong, Larry Hartsell, Dan Inosanto and a few others would train privately at his house together...it was like every Saturday. Ted Wong did not start training with Bruce until 1967 a full 3 years after Dan started so do not come in here and say that Ted Wong spent more time with Bruce than any other person because that is total crap. Was Ted Wong a private student of Bruce..Yes. Is Ted Wong very good at what he does...Yes. Is Ted Wong teaching what Bruce taught him...Yes. However the comment I made was pointing out the fact that Ted is not teaching everything that Bruce taught him because he feels that some of the things are not realistic...one of those is trapping. Agreed...Bruce personally stopped training trapping towards the end of his life and that was because he was so intuitive to his opponent that he could read there body language and knew what they were going to do almost before they did it. He was so fast that he did not have to trap because he could hit them before they had a chance to block and hit him. You say that blocking is a waste of time...and that Bruce felt that blocking was a waste of time. I agree to a point. If all you are doing is blocking then yes it is a waste of time because the only thing you have accomplished is not getting hit for that one attack. Thats why Bruce did Lin Sil Di Da which is to simultaneously hit and defend at the same time. If you block then you need to hit at the same time or just use your footwork and move out of the way or use the evasive boxing that Bruce has in JKD and slip,bob and weave or duck under the attack. Also, if you read my post yo uwill see where I said that Ted Wong moves around great... I believe footwork is the most important part of fighting. Also Ted and Bruce did not train for hours everyday... they did train for hours when they trained and there were short stints when they would train everyday but the everyday thing was not consistant. They did train several times a week until Bruce went to Hong Kong to make movies then Ted like the others were not able to train with Bruce. What I said is that Ted Wong does not teach EVERYTHING that Bruce taught him...big difference! He may not believe in trapping anymore but if Bruce taught him trapping then shouldn't he teach that to people so they can have a clear picture of what Bruce was doing? I know it is his right to teach and not teach whatever he wants. Have you ever trained with Dan? Have you ever trained with Larry Hartsell? Have you ever trained with Jerry Poteet or the late Ted Lucaylucay? I only ask because you say that Dan teaches MMA and JKD Concepts...and you are right he does teach both of those...but if you go to his school in L.A. you can sign up and take his Jun Fan class where all he teaches is Jun Fan/JKD just like Bruce taught him. He does not add anything to it. It is purely Jun Fan. I have trained out there several times and think the class is great. I have also trianed with Larry Hartsell for 13 years and when we bring him in for a seminar or when we go out there for a private training weekend if we tell him that we would like to work on Jun Fan only then he will teach us only Jun Fan. He will teach us what he learned from Bruce during his time with him. Simplicity said it best yesterday when he said....it is the students of these instructors who are always spreading the political BS and not the instructors.
Here is an email that I received from the BFL a while back. I had sent them an email with a few questions after reading all the rumors online. Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 13:44:03 -0500 From: info@bruceleefoundation.org Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert To: Subject: Question Dear Tim, Thank you for your e-mail to the Foundation. Sorry it has taken a bit to get back to you. The Foundation is not the only recognizing body of JKD, and there are other qualified instructors out there. In addition, it is not true that Dan Inosanto or his students will be excluded from recognition. Our program is open to anyone who wishes to partake in it. Sincerely, The Bruce Lee Foundation
Points taken, please paragraphs next time, my eyes hurt. Although Dan did train with Bruce before Ted did, Bruce had not fully developed JKD at the time. When Ted became a direct student, towards the end of Bruce's life, thats when his ideals were being more concrete. Ted Wong does not teach trapping for the fact that if you can remove an oppstical, which is what trapping does, then you can hit the person. Listen, as long as people understand that there is a difference between concepts, and OJKD , then fine by me. However, when people claim that what Bruce taught at the end of his life was a mixture of various styles , "26 styles" which incorporated such tactics as the "praying mantis" , it's insulting. Bruce was a very independent fellow, and did not share much of what he taught himself. Many people who trained with Bruce took pieces of what he taught. There were times in his life when he did emphasize trapping, and thats why many teachers (such as Dan) claim that the core of JKD is trapping, which it is not. Bruce did away with that becuase it was not efficient. Yes, he could track his opponents like he had a 6th sense, but one of the reasons why was because of his footwork and stance. Therefore to say he only did away with trapping because he was so quick is not entirely true. Ted teaches very little, and he puts a strong emphasis on footwork, yes that is true. One of the reasons is because of simplicity, and also because of his age. Don't expect a near 70 year old man to do a flying side kick. He adjusts as he becomes older, but he still sticks to the OJKD roots, which is why he is still amazing. Try to understand it from a bigger picture. A bit of muay thai, a bit of silat, a bit of karate, a bit of grappling, a bit of this, a bit of that...they are all partial truths. They all have limitations, cultural restrictions that instructors teach. There is no refinement in any of these tactics , for it takes YEARS to truly understand motion and movement. To throw a bunch of arts together and call it JKD is a disgrace to Bruce. Bruce was looking to do one thing, and one thing only , and that was to create the most efficient, scientifically sound form of street fighting, and he did. That is exactly why he was so amazing, and why his footwork and stance operates the way it does. Strong side forward, straight lead, half beat footwork...etc There is much disarray about what JKD is, for it is not meant to be a style which is , sadly, what I am making it out to be. A style is already a pre-conceived notion , a limit. It's like saying "here are your tools, you can only do these things". What Bruce taught was the ability to understand motion , "to flow". "When my opponent expands, i contract, when he contracts, i expand". A style is merely a word. We all move the same as human beings, no matter how you look at it. HOWEVER THERE IS ONLY ONE , MOST EFFICIENT WAY TO MOVE , and that is exactly what Bruce sought to create, and it happened at the end of his life. Look at it like this, whats the difference between a Hyundai and a Ferrari? They both have 4 wheels, 4 tires, headlights, brakes, a hood, etc, you get the point? Well, what's the difference? One gets the job done, one is functional, point A, to point B. But the Ferrari, that is efficiency, that is engineering at it's best, a pure beast of a car that can utilize handling, speed, physics, and that is precisely why it is the best. That is what Bruce taught.
now your arguing with men who have twice the experience in jkd than you. your oppinion is welcomed but questioning some who are and have been invovled in jkd ,teach jkd and have used jkd, is absurd.
While all you can say is that im wrong, go read the Tao, and Commentaries on the martial way. Read Bruce's teachings on stance, footwork and his punches and kicks. Then apply that to physics and science. Then , if you get that far, you'll understand why Bruce taught what he did . (From a scientific viewpoint, it is the most efficient way of fighting). But wrong? I'm afraid not.
I didn't realize i mentioned how much experience i had? Oh wait, I didn't. Not looking for a personal battle, just stating facts.
ok, have read them both lots of times. scientifc view point? what? don't know about that,i just know what works in sparring. i could go into detail where you are wrong. tim has covered that plus i don't have all day
