Very informative discussion about what JKD is and isn't

that is a good answer.

 

Sgt Major very kindly agreed to re-open this thread, so how about we all contribute to it again? I'll add my contribution in a bit.

Emil

 

I would kind of agree with this, but that depends on what degree the concepts follows. If, for example, the concept style doesn't follow the Power side forward, it is not JKD. If it does not contain certain elements from the 'Core arts' i.e. boxing, fencing, wing chun, etc, then is is not JKD. Many people are too quick to jump on the idea of style of no style, but JKD does have a definite structure despite what anyone says. I have posted this before, but for reference, I will post again -

BRUCE LEE'S JEET KUNE DO
Power Side Forward
Bai Jong Position (Small Phasic Bent Knee Stance)
Centerline Preservation
Maximum Economy of Structure
Simplification Over Complication
Light, Quick, Explosive Footwork
Shifty, Alive, Evasive Body Movements
Dynamic Entering Techniques
Longest Weapon to Nearest Target
Emphasis On Interception
Straight and Curved Line Attacks
Aggressive Attack Empasized Over Defense
Lin Sil Die Dar (Simultaneous Defense & Attack)
Bruce Lee's Five Ways of Attack

Therefore, by not including this into the conepts training, you are not doing JKD. What you choose to add after that is at your own disgression.

 

i have my own views on this, hmmmmmmm where do i start....

... right. Jeet Kune Do IS a STYLE well more of a system, it has it's own characteristics which make it famous like all styles do! Yes Bruce Lee said it wasn't but he didnt want it to be other styles like karate were at the time. All set in stone. He wanted it to be a style that can customized to the practitioners' needs.

Jun Fan Gung Fu is simply the core of the style, the thing that makes up Jeet Kune Do.

Personally I would choose to learn Jun Fan Gung Fu, from someone such as Dan Inosanto without the kali etc, then intergrate the kali etc after I have a good grounding in the core.

I believe that Jeet Kune Do, is the system/ style that Bruce Lee left the world, but he wanted the practitioners to customize it.

Without the core (Jun Fan Gung Fu) it is NOT Jeet Kune Do, the style.

When people say they are doing JKD by choosing certain techniques etc from different arts and incorporating it into their own style they are doing the PROCESS of Jeet Kune Do, how is it JKD if it has nothing to do with an intercepting fist???????

what do you think?

 

I think that's right, I think that you expressed it very well and eloquently, and is in-line with my own conclusion about it's origin, and it's development.

 

Nicely put Matt. Thanks for contributing.

 

My studies

jkd is just a word describing fighting. its like anything you do. if you do something enough u learn more about it and how to become better at it.

 

The way I've always studied JKD is similar to what you said, but my friends and I have always called it integrated martial arts as a more accurate name. Try not to think of it as a combination of styles, but of techniques. A kick from TKD, a lock from BJJ, a punch from boxing. All things formed into one formless, seamless effort that you've created within yourself.

 

In my experience 'style' is nothing more than self-imposed limitations. Bruce Lee's version of JKD did include Jun Fan Gung Fu but that doesn't mean that anything lacking this is any less. JKD is a philosophy at heart, not a style. Each person develops their own means to the same end, winning the fight.

 

What people don't understand is that you can't apply a STYLE of fighting until you learn the basics of FIGHTING itself. Practically no one out there knows those anymore, or seek them without a blindfold over their eyes.

Learn what a fight consists of, learn how your body works, find the best way you can apply what you have to achieve your goal. It's a simple, logical formula that works for everything (understand the goal, the means, the application).

I personally find the rise of BJJ to be convergent with the decay of striking martial arts. Even boxers today know nothing of the power line and don't use their lead arm well, don't coordinate footwork with their strikes, have no precision whatsoever, and no notion of defense (the "clinch clinch" effect).

Many of today's martial arts "masters" have powerful punches with the secret being hip rotation and hard work. Any young street fighter has a lot more insight into the art of fighting.

It all comes down to understanding what you're doing (styles are no answer to a fight), what you have (people don't understand they can all produce KO punches with little effort), and how to apply what you have in relation to what you're doing to achieve results.

 

That's a very good point.

I disagree. I'd say that bad boxers do this. But by comparing all martial artists to the standards of the bad martial artists is unfair.

That's probably true. I think that sometimes MA's can over-intelectualize things - sometimes, MA training can be detrimental to how you end up in a fight.

I tend to not think of styles. When I am grappling, i don't think "yeah, I'm using JuuJutsu now", or think "Yeah, I'm using Aikido now" when i wrist lock somedody. This is what JKD tries to get away from. By planning a situation, you leave yourself open. If you think "I'll train x technique in case I get hit by y strike" you are leaving a big gap. The idea is flowing between techniques naturally. Now I hate to use the Bruce Lee cliched quotes like the one I am about to use, because so many people just throw them around thinking they sound cool but without having any idea what they mean, but I think this one is appropriate - "Be like water". One should flow between movements, and naturally use the most applicable techniques without haveing to think. To quote the Tao Te Ching - "Practice not doing, and everything will fall into place".

Em

 

the problem i think you are refering to is that students often think in terms of technique not concepts. from students new to jkd that have practiced some other kind of martial art before we spend a great deal of time attempting to seperate technique and concept.

where did that idea come from that a person needs a technique against a front kick, another for dealing with a wrist lock, then yet another method for protecting against the right cross? before long the students have countless techniques.

worse is students have difficulty using the same technique in different ways. because they have no idea of the concept. the reason i spend a great deal of time with muay thai is because only the concept matters. granted there are some techniques in muay thai yet they are not for specific attacks.

the difference in reality is too much has been invested with learning a new and/or different technique for every conciveable situation. because muay thai only teaches a few techniques and then applys the material in sparring a student has to understand how to use the material for different things.

thers no specific technique for dealing with say a lead hand punch. just a reponse based on range and opprotunity. we might say nearest weapon to nearest target yet thats a concept not a technique. and my definition of what jkd is would be not a fixed response.

now if someone asked what i think jkd isnt my first thought would be a style. because there you have that confinment. the whole attack #1 defense #2 nonsense. theres a old boxing adage which goes 'everyone has a plan until they get hit'. just respond not expect.

 

I think the mentality of having to use technique "A" when Attack "A" is used, and not understanding the endless uses for the concept, is very common for a simple reason. Much like how many artists can draw very well as long as they are looking at something, but have a difficult time drawing from memory or just by using their creativity. We must understand the composition so well, and have the skill necessary to create, before we can ever break away from painting still life.

ok i'm done with the art analogy. sorry it went on for so long but hey, i'm an artist- it's what i know.

 

Your post is exactly right, and you have highlighted probably the main problem of the "classical mess" that Bruce wanted to move away from. JKD has very few techniques. This is one of the things that defines JKD. Many other scientific methods of self defense employ this scholl of though. Look at combatives, for example. A combatives instructor will advise the student to apply the same technique in a variety of situations. A good example of this is defending with alternate hands. If somebody grabs you from behind, a combatives instructor will show you a technique that you use with both hands. Not, as is taught in many TMA's, one technique for the right hand, and a different one for the left. In combatives, it is the same technique, done in the same way, so as to not cause confusion. This works!

Em

 

absorb, put in the lab, and use what works for you......

 

let me pitch this analogy a student in class used and tell me what you think. say your learning to play baseball. and working on batting skills. maybe at first you learn the basics of how to hit the ball and emulate what others are doing. to get it right you apply the basics although change the way you swing the bat. maybe you hit better from the left side or grip the bat a little higher. are you not still hitting the ball and playing baseball?

after giving his analogy some thought i felt it was a good description of what jkd is and isnt. the objective being learning how to fight stays the same. the concepts of technique might be the same. theres just a point where you have to stop copying your instructor/class and figure out what changes need to be made on this personal level.

maybe i got the wrong interpetation about what he meant? thats just my take on what sounded like a practical example. any thoughts?

 

I think that's a very good analogy, actually. It epitomises Bruce's message, and can extend to more than just fighting, I feel.

Em

 

The analogy - okay what you are saying is profound indeed, you are saying don't use JKD kicks , punches, etc , but instead use a Baseball bat to get the job done faster & more efficiently , now thats JKD! Lol.

The funny thing with JKD is getting people to explain it, especially JKD Concepts, ask them - 'well, what are the Concepts, define them?', they usually struggle or give you some nonsense like study several arts till you are good at them , blend them so you flow in combat between styles. Thats not Concepts!

Concepts in martial arts should be say applying principles & concepts in combat, and minimising respoinses as much as possible e.g. Have the same responses say for certain angles, a hook kick to head / reverse knifehand/ hook punch, etc all follow same angle so use the same technique or concept to respond to it, not have 50 responses more to think of & less likely you will choose the appropriate one in that split second you have to respond. That is more Concepts running through your system or art than JKD Concepts - with above example, having Kali response say destruction of arm and strike/ JKD responses parry & hit or stop hit / Muay Thai cover & strike with elbow / BJJ duck under and takedown, etc.

People in JKD like to talk of Concepts, but most struggle to define what the heck they are talking about , or they give you some philosophy bull to cover up the fact they can't really define them.

 

Regarding Concepts I know someone that does Japanese Jiu-jitsu they learn 20 defences against a wrist grab or lapel grab, all different ones, so there full arsenal is hundreds if not thousands of techniques, from which they just need to select the appropriate one from all those at a given momment & good luck!

Same with simple thing like angles mentioned above some teach for angle like hook punch / rear hook kick to head, etc they teach different responses for each to an attack to same area and at same angle, so they have to select at given moment the right technique from a huge arsenal : recognise height of attack/ type of attack and respond appropriately.

When you could in many cases simplify things to same response to any attack same height & angle or even more simplified same response to attacks from same angle at any height. Not only do many JKD Concepts people have many resposes to same attacks, you can multiply that even further to include responses from all the different arts they do - BJJ, Kali, Muay Thai, Jun Fan, etc. Where is the Concept in that?

 

There's a book called Tao of Jeet Kune Do which clearly outlines the concepts of the art form. Pick up a copy and you will learn exactly what has been refered to.

The idea of having 50 different responses to choose from is NOT something found in JKD. Maybe that's a bad habit you picked up on a martial art that uses such an approach. JKD is about spontaneous response and being in the moment.

The analogy given earlier had nothing to do with hitting someone with a baseball bat. Was that a little to deep for you to follow? Here's maybe a simpler version that even you might understand.

Fighting is not defined by doing everything the same way as your instructor does. Making benificial changes in your method of doing things does'nt mean that you're no longer fighting. Just that you have chosen the best way of fighting for you're own personal needs.