I often hear that many original Bruce proteges and students don't want to use the JKD name, because they "don't want to profit off Bruce's name". At the same time, when Bruce was alive, he charged VERY high prices for teaching students JKD. What I don't understand is, if the master was so much about making money, why can't the students be ?
I don't think it was the making money part that bothered him. It was the adherence to the name. I doubt he'd have a problem with (for example) Paul Vunak charging through the nose for "Progressive Fighting Systems" because he's not getting hung up on the name JKD. It was a philosophical objection to being "trapped", not a complaint with the free market system. Stuart
99.9% of JKD instructors are commercialised. the other 0.1% is Bruce. Sorry boy and girls but that's the truth, they are all living off of Bruce Lee's name, they name him in the adverts and they mention his name in every class and they charge the earth for the privallage. As you all know, through expeariance of other people, as it goes through one generation to the next, the quality is not the same, the art is not the same as Bruce's, and the progression is not the same, but the name droppping never stops. Many think they are like Bruce Lee because they do his art, at the end of the day, their is only one Bruce Lee and quite frankley he is turning in his grave when he see's what most of the so called JKD instructors are doing now. EARNING A LIVING FROM HIS NAME. No Offence people but that's the truth. regards Pat
yea i will agree with you to some degree. however, my instructor does NOT charge me, and rarely brings up bruce. the only time he addresses that is when a fellow classmate asks him something about bruce, etc. i realize the 99% is an exaggeration and I see your point, but there are some GENUINE instructors out there.
And I bet you could count them on one finger. And this comes from a person (myself) who spent a long long time in JKD. regards Pat
It's fuuny really when you look at it. JKD: We don't wear uniforms. TRUTH: You all wear the same T-shirt's and shorts, similar training shoes during class, you know the ones with a badge for everything except basket weaving (maybe that's what the blank circle on the shirt is for, an un-finnished basket). JKD: We don't do forms. TRUTH: You do 2 man DRILLS and many do Jurus (Forms) from Silat, a 2 man drill is a Form. You train Footwork and pad work using set patterns (forms). JKD: This style *Insert Style Here* is a clasical mess. TRUTH: Most people who teach JKD teach a mess of Classical Techniques from a mess of different styles, and never spend enough time in any one style to truely understand why they do what they do. JKD: Is an evolution. TRUTH: Was an evolution by one person. The rest, A jack of all trades and a Master of none. There is no harm in training this way, but don't claim to be something that is better than everything else when all your doing is taking bits from everything else, and I cant state to many times, TAKING BITS. But as with every art and everything in the world, there is always an exception to the rule. It's not the art that makes you good, it's the person in the art that makes the art good. All hail the day when JKD decides to stop knocking other arts and pretending that they are superior to other arts and start to realise that they are for the majority doing exactly the same as everyone else, just trying to improve. You have to remember one thing, in order to evolve you have to use your imagination, not take your instructors word for it that this is the way to do it, just because he dropped Bruce Lee's name. 90% of JKD students I am affraid to say are followers when the whole point of JKD is to become an individual, and pitty those who try to become individual because "that is wrong, because Dan does'nt do it that way, or Bruce never done it that way or *insert JKD Instructors name here* never does it that way" As stated by many JKD instructors. Regards Pat
yea while i agree with you to some degree on your previous points, i also disagree. i think you are generalizing too much when it comes to instructors. i dont know of anyone who said JKD is better than "this style", but im sure there are ones out there. like what? i know instructors who IMMERSE their students in a respective style, dissect it, apply it, and see what works for them. my instructor is a 3rd degree black belt in aikido under obata(sp), and im learning a lot of effective throws and joint locks for instance. do you believe there is a difference in repetition vs. pattern? because there is. i dont know where you got this idea from because i know my instructor and all my classmates highly RESPECT and HONOR all other arts. i constantly challenge my instructor with applications and techniques. i see what works for him and what works for me. when people start JKD, they are all followers (imho). you have to 1) learn 2) master 3) forget. when people start figuring out their weaknesses and limitations and strengths, thats when they start becoming an individual. they have to know the proper mechanics of a kick, punch, etc to truly understand a techniques application. only through intense understanding of the technique and principle can they find out if it works for them(or be an individual and question the effectiveness) all this requires sometype of learning, which in essence is following. quite contradicting isnt it?
JKD will always be subject to different opinions about what it is and JKD practictioners defend their art like no other, "ask five different instructors what JKD is about and you will get five different answers", that was a quote from a JKD instructor.
tel interesting debate,but none of my jkd instructors have never said that jkd is better than all the rest,they help with using the stuff u got.also.I have one question for pat o malley,with all respect where does bob breen,rick young,terry barnett fit into this
Jkd I personally don't care about the "political side" of JKD. I love going to class, and I get a lot out of it. So the political side of "is it true to Bruce, etc." or "is it exploiting Bruce" is not really of that much importance to me personally. But I realize that others might see it differently. Regarding "classical mess", I think what they mean in JKD by that is a form that is passed on from century to century, but that is not tested to see if it still works. A classic expample would be the "horse stance" from Chinese martial arts. Bruce referred to it as a "mess" because it was so impractical. So to Bruce, impractical + not tested to see if it works in a dynamic fight = "classical mess". I kind of disagree with the statement above: ---------------------------------------------------------- JKD: This style *Insert Style Here* is a clasical mess. TRUTH: Most people who teach JKD teach a mess of Classical Techniques from a mess of different styles, and never spend enough time in any one style to truely understand why they do what they do. ---------------------------------------------------------- In my JKD class, we have a set group of things we train (punching, kicking, footwork, boxing defense, and some grappling), which work very well, and we constantly retrain them, under fluid, dynamic conditions. Most of them are not "Classical Techniques". For example, strong-side forward punching is not "classical" (!). What you are saying might be much more true for "JKD Concepts" (and I would agree with you much more with respect to that flavor of JKD) - where they train in so many different things. But in "Functional JKD" (Ted Wong, et. al.) that is much less the case. In Functional JKD, we do the "basic program" over and over, and we spend a lot of time on those base things. For example, we have almost no "classical" Asian stuff in our JKD. It is mostly western boxing and fencing. We don't do silat or kali, either. We keep it basic.
tel the thing is when bruce lee said these things,its seems to me that he was talking bout the ways things were taught in the usa in the 50's and 60's not arts because the people training in these arts changed it to suit them thats why there are so many arts.so when bruce lee laid down the principles they had a certain goal.But because martial arts have changed over the years these principles although the same the aim has changed,so instead of doing one art and not being allowed to go to a different club,(which has changed).the aim now is to try and thread a few things together and make you more rounded,and not learn loads of different arts for sake ot it,regards kung fu when using the stances u are only there for a moment,so u are forever changing stances cos a fight is forever changing
Casting off I don't think Bruce was adding techniques. The way I see it, he was casting things off. It is almost like, you start with all the techniques in all the martial arts, and you, over time, throw out the ones you don't like. In the end, you have a foundation of things that work for you. So you are not adding things, you are removing things, I think. [It is kind of like that scene in the movie Platoon, in which the older, experienced soldier is removing things from the new guy's backpack, and saying, "you won't need this, or that, or that". In the end, the new guy has the basics of what he will need in the jungle, and has thrown out what is not required. I think that is what Bruce meant by "keep what is useful, discard what is not useful"].
tel agree with the fact that he was disgarding wot is useless,but didnt mention that cos its part of the basis which jkd was based,but if anyone is unsure wot bruce was doing with jkd than just watch the jkd video 'bruce lee jeet kune do' explains it. the thing with jkd now it your looking for a few technqiues that weaved together to form a complete self defence system for yourself so in essance add what is useful discard what is useless add what is your own. the thing is when jkd was formed people were training in karate and not sparring of any kind,now that everybody is cross training u have to beware that everyone can kickbox,trap and grapple.so jkd is not taking shots at other arts just trying to get the best out of themselves using all arts
JKD guy, Do you have any examples of such students? From what I know only two people were certified under Si-Gung Bruce and one was Dan Inosanto. Guro Dan is also the only of the two who does still certify. All others should not teach/certify in JKD or use the name anyways, should they? Now when speaking of the JKD off-spring of Guro Dan that is another story, I can think of some who don't use JKD as their teaching style. Gruhn
ap Oweyn, Interesting, from what I "remember" Inosanto only names himself and Kimura in his JKD videos. Does anyone have any information on Daniel Lee's certification? I am simply interested. Gruhn
