No i just think that people who study JKD are trying in a way to bypass the basic art that forms the basis of JKD and that they are trying to emulate a guy who made MA his entire life. You wont be able to do half what Bruce did and all he left was books. So you are basically learning WC with an influence from books..I don't know...every time I say anything I get called a troll..
I'm not saying what you guys learn doesnt work..but what is JKD? Youre instructor must have studied some other style before deciding he was a JKD man..otherwise he'd be teaching you from looking at books..and what he teaches you...? Don't you think that will differ depending on the JKD teacher and basically be whatever they learnt as a base MA?
This is so wrong and wide of the mark and again you have not done JKD, so cannot really claim to have a knowledge of it. Bruce was a pioneer, but there are better now, much like Arnie was a pioneer, but could not hold a candle to the guys of today. To say we are learning wc, with an influence from books is absolutely stupid. So many JKD guys I know travel all over theworld seeking out the very best in each of their prefered arts. Like you said in your first line, "you think". You don't know.
There is some truth in this. If you go to a gym and the instructor is a marathon runner, there is a good chance you will be given a programme including a lot of cardio. If he is a bodybuilder you often get a programme with a lot of lifting in it. This is why I prefer the term, "coach", rather than instructor. I like to coach the individual, rather than just over my style. That said the student will need to learn the base I offer. Once an understanding is established though the student is encouraged to search out there own style. JKD is a vehicle to get you from one side of the water to the other. It is not to be carried on ones back once you get there. It is also correct that each JKD instructor will be different, depending on their own prefered art(s). I do not see this as a down side though.
I never understood a JKD or MMA instructor. like hannibal said, the word coach is better. you shouldn't be learning "new technique" but rather developing your own way to deal with an attack. style or no style right? btw melb - good on you for performing an trolloxorcism and being normalish - no one is normal on MAP.
WC is NOT the basic art of JKD mel - you are showing tremendous ignorance here because you clearly have an agenda. It was simply Bruce's original art (not including Tai Chi of course which he learned from his father). Perhaps try and understand the JKD-101 philosophy before you start ranting and drooling like you have here because once again your reputation as a stubborn, ignorant troll is being justified
Im sorry if I offended you Hannibal but it has always been my understanding that WC was Bruce's base art as he learnt under Yip Man in his youth..Now maybe that is "tremendous ignorance" but that's how the popular story goes. When you start saying things like ranting, drooling ignorant troll I wonder if a nerve has been hit? As I said earlier I don't doubt that many JKD guys know what theyr'e doing, in fact I think a lot of them are at the forefront of MA but please don't go all crazy when someone questions your style. Im not saying it's bad I'm just asking what it is..
No offence taken mel, and to be fair you did curtail it later, but your opening salvo on a thread that has been dormant for a bit was inflammatory. Note I do not - and have never - considered you a troll, but I do occasionally point out why people perceive you in that way. Wing Chun WAS his first art, but by the end of his life there were only a few principles and techniques remaining. He found it too restrictive and confining, and although critical of many of it's practitioners (specifically the fact that they did not train realistically) he was always respectful to Yip Man. Any casual glance at Sijo Lee's development can show the massive changes in his training and style. Here is early footage where he is teaching "non-classical Gung Fu", which is clearly Wing Chun based [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87bxTNTmgv8"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87bxTNTmgv8[/ame] [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCRr50a7cNs&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCRr50a7cNs&feature=related[/ame] Then we move on to the Jun-Fan style era. Not the emphasis on single attack interceptions and responses. This was after Bruce had seen WC's limitations and started to look for ways to address those gaps. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-6fjoVT1Zk"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-6fjoVT1Zk[/ame] And finally the JKD phase. Here he had abandoned most pretences of style and was instead looking at combinations, flow and effectiveness beyond any simple systematic dogma [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8aUPDkPEsQ&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8aUPDkPEsQ&feature=related[/ame] [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVd0wLrZDJs&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVd0wLrZDJs&feature=related[/ame] Given such a tremendous change in his development there can hardly be much of a case for WC being the core art. It was just one piece of an overall puzzle. A lot of the division has arisen because of people that trained with him at different times mantain their stuff as "real Bruce's art". It is all about money and politics. The only one with him all the way through was Guru Dan so he is *my* yardstick. Philosophically and physically he is the best embodiment of the JKD approach. Then you have my Instructor who is primarily concerned with effing people up as quickly as possible - that is why I gravitated to him. As a very rough approximation (for those that need such things) we are a mix of Muay Thai, Jits, Kali, Tai Chi, Wing Chun and Kina Mutai. Again these tend to be conceptual rather than a simple composite, so do not get too caught up on the specific arts.
umm..first video a couple of guys doing WC without any skill or footwork. 2nd video couldnt c what was going on. 3rd video couldnt c what was going on. 4th video a couple of guys doing sidekicks..and fifth..yeah well..sorry but what is this meant to show?
Ive read the Tao of JKD as well and thought at the end yeah that was good but WTF? Good pics for wrestling. You guys are pretty tender...wouldve expected some prepared reply to be honest.
Hannibals not a bad bloke in the end. I wish him no ill will. like I said its the JKD guys who pick the pace up but you have to have some understanding as to what you're trying to change!
What specifically do you not understand about the videos mel? It demonstrates the evolutionary process. The forst one had plenty of footwork - it was just isolated to specific drill movements. WC has a PLETHROA of drills like that, and you cannot say otherwise! The video was a demo The second video was showing the variation from standard WC already being evident in Bruce's movements the third shows a VAST difference, and was teh move towards kickboxing-esque sparring. Not Bruce tends to still use single interceptions at this point in his career. Latterly he was a combination man The fourth and Fifth videos are what bruce chose to demo at those moments. What he demonstrates gives you an idea of where he was. there is little trapping and LOTS of movement and range in this phase of his evolution. Ted Wong did very little trapping from his time with Bruce, because Bruce considered it almost ancilliiary by then. Other students had different experiences. Each video shows what bruce demo'd at the stages in his career - the end is so far removed from the beginning that WC cannot be held to be the core style anymore
Its not about the videos, never has been. Its been about what makes someone a JKD guy vs a WC guy..its a lifetime thing to learn a MA and it drives me f'in nuts that SOME people who train realistically think they are the ONLY people that do so.
WC like any other art is only as good as it is trained. It also has huge gaps in it that need to be addressed properly (grappling being the most obvious, but there are other issues) JKD is best thought of as a process, not an art in and of itself. We are pretty shameless - if something works we take it; if it doesn't we lose it
