Hi, i have just read Teri Tom book and i was wondering whether her claim is true on Jeet Kune Do as an art. My question is on her claim whether Bruce Lee did abandon chi sao, trapping and the wooden dummy for a more kickboxing style type of martial art in JKD? Another question is her teacher Ted Wong, is his teaching very different from the norm on JKD?
i believe it abandoned chi sao for springing energy drills. if you read the tao it's much more boxing/kickboxing related than wingchun related in striking and mobility. Bruce also mentioned he had lost faith in classical chinese martial arts.
From what I have heard/read, Ted Wong teaches the more traditional aspect of JKD, or as it is often called, Original JKD.
Okay, but from what Teri Tom is claiming in her book, it seems that Ted Wong does not teach trapping, i was wondering if the founder of the art really did abandon the trapping part in the later development of the art in the end of the 1970.
He probably didnt need to trap,at his level his awareness,non telegraphic, closing and punching skills were so well developed the trapping wasnt needed anymore(i would guess)
its funny cos jerry poteet and dan inosanto where there and they say that bruce lee kept the chi sao stuff. and jerry poteet teaches ojkd
I didn't think Ted taught any chi sau and only taught very basic trapping i.e. pak sau/punch. It's pretty hilarious observing the infighting between various OBLS's about who has "t3h r34l JayKayDee"....JKD was always supposed to be about individual expression, I think it's obvious that Bruce didn't teach all his students in exactly the same way - he was experimenting with them, hence each of them believing only theirs is the "correct" way. Also just some food for thought, it's probably in their own interests to abandon the stuff they personally either a) don't like, or b) aren't very good at and then claim it was never a part of JKD. To my mind the only guy who does things in the real spirit of JKD is Inosanato.
If I understand correctly are you suggesting that Ted Wong was taught chi sau by Bruce but does not emphasis it in his own training?
My teacher doesn't use chi sau or wooden dummy in his training. As such, I don't use it in mine. I might at some point, if it becomes useful. I could care less if Bruce Lee did, Jerry Poteet does, or Ted Wong does. If I ever learn from them, it will become relevant. Until then, meh.
Hang on a second, chi sao is a springy energy drill. Also which tao are we talking about tao of gung fu or tao of JKD?
Decent book--not many like it out there... In my time and experience training in JKD, there is very little *traditional* looking chi sao, although I have seen some of it from various sources. However, whats in a name? Should we be comcerned with chi sao as a specific, unrefinable drill, or is it the idea thats important? Coincidentally, what I have seen in EVERY JKD setting Ive ever visited is hubud/lubud style drills, which are exactly like beginner chi sao drills but have flow and breathe life in them. And when elements get introduced at higher levels, they become much less scripted, but still encapsulate the energy flow that appears to be missing in many more traditional settings, which seem almost robotic at times. Did Bruce Lee abandon traditional chi sao? Who knows, who cares. Does present-day JKD use chi sao as it appears in traditional wing chun schools? Maybe to a degree, more or less depending on teacher. Do present-day JKD schools use a similar idea of chi sao but modified to suit a more organic development, ie hubud-type drills? Absolutely!
specifically the springing energy drill that is commonly in the fuq sao/tan sao position. I practice that plus chi sao, don chi, and luk sao. I meant the tao of jkd.
Not sure Rick, just saying that it could be a possibility... The most I can gather is that there were differences in what Bruce was emphasising in his training during different periods. Wong met him in '67 - during i guess what you'd call the "last phase" of Lee's development, when there was less emphasis on traditional Wing Chun practice. I don't think that neccessarily means that Wong's method is the "wrong" or "right" way, it's just what he was taught. Check out this article by Tim Tackett, in which he explains the subtle differences in the way people were taught and why.
Hi Sorry for the late reply. Has far as i know, bruce only taught Ted wong the boxing/kickboxing side of the art, There could be many reasons for this, but i know jerry would ask Bruce to teach the energy stuff.Maybe thats why jerry has a lot of energy training in his teaching But it seems to me when listen to all the ojkd people talk, Bruce showed them different things, so they all seem to think what they where shown was what jkd was,It appears as tho dan inosanto was the only one shown everything Bruce was into, this explains why the jkd grappling argument started, because they where not shown it
Answering the question strictly: yeah he "abandoned" it. There's some that have argued that it was done mostly out of who he was training with- ideas of attachment were not working. Depends on who you talk to. Anyway. That aside, am with Yohan and Dae Han- who cares? I have some occasional use for trapping when pressure-testing, but have largely abandoned it. Chi sao in some ways is even more useful, but have not been using much of it in training either. I think it's a good early training tool for some, less so long-term. +1 on Dan Inosanto BTW. There's a couple other folk that are maintaining that spirit- Matt Thornton, Steve Grody, Dog Brothers...
Don't assume anything guys here, know the "TRUTH".....I just trained with Jesse Glover & Ted Wong over the last weekend. Paul Bax hosted a great seminar billed "The First & Last Student Of Bruce Lee. Ted Wong is an awesome JKD teacher and moves better than the last time I seen him. Jesse Glover is awesome teacher as well.....Don't kid-yourself thinking Ted Wong doesn't know energy training that Bruce Lee taught...I can't speak for him, I can only give my "real time" observation of him.....Sifu Ted Wong during the seminar did some energy trapping on me showing me that the principle's are still the same if in attachment or de-attachment....Somthing I knew already from experience.....Neither the less, I think he did that to me to show me that he knows "IT" as well...... My sugguesting to everyone is FIND OUT FOR YOURSELVES. Before making statement about people from hand me down information, unless you experience yourself in the flesh........Something to think about!!!! :bang: Paul Bax did an awesome job hosting this seminar. There was so much Brotherly Love. This was one of the best for JKD Brotherly Love; very talented people attended the "Historical Training Event". Before this seminar I was not sure that JKD was going in the right direction. After this seminar, I see that there are very talented people out with good intention in their heart. Bruce Lee would have been proud, in my opinion. Keep training hard everyone and have a great day! Keep "IT" Real, John McNabney
It's one of the reasons I keep out of these type of debates. Hopefully some time in the fall Richard Torres will be in Virginia doing a seminar and I know for a fact that he has trained numerous times with Ted Wong. Richard Torres is my instructors teacher. I may even drive up to New York to attend the Ted Wong Seminar he is hosting. Link below for anyone interested. http://www.jkdmartialarts.com/
