Lazy Scholar

Thank you! I don't know if you've done JKD yourself, at one point. But I'm taking on a similar mindset.

True refinement seeks simplicity == Bruce Lee (at least, it's attributed to him) accumulation leads to ornamentation. accumulation is only half way cultivation. (From the Tao of JKD) Daily Decrease.

But, there were others before him who did something similar. The idea was popularized because of him. People can make the argument for Shaolin being one of the first to "mix" systems. You have the five animal system, Wing Chun, Choy Lay Fut, etc. Brazilian Jiu Jitsu was a synthesis of Traditional Jiu Jitsu, Gracie's own insights, and I think Judo. Tae Kwon Do (though its origin is debatable) can be argued as a mixture of select styles within the indigenous Korean Arts, and influences from the Japanese, and Chinese. I can go on, and on.

Come to LA Chinatown on Sunday if you can, you'll expect a tight-knit and open training group of students in JKD. 817 Yale St. Los Angeles, CA 90012. We start at 10am!

It's an art and science, not so much style. It's kind of like boxing, in that, style is more like an expression. But, there are five punches (boxing like) and three kicks; with one primary stances, and two secondary and tertiary stances dictated by distance.

Hey, I see you're in Downey. Do take a Sunday out of your time and head to Los Angeles Chinatown to train in JKD. 10am to 12pm at Alpine Recreation Center : 817 Yale St. Los Angeles, CA 90012 . Instruction at the moment is by Adam Zerkel, instructor under Mark Stewart.

https://www.jkdwednite.com and go to their affiliated schools page. The guys' name is Dean Goldale.

To answer your question about people claiming to do JKD while adding stuff and looking sloppy simultaneously, I will answer with a series of questions or litmus tests rather: * do they exhibit the very basics of the art? - Onguard Position done properly, footwork, the basic puches and kicks I already alluded to, basicaly asking, are they doing JKD period. * secondly, it seems as though they haven't put whatever tool they're trying to add into a rigorous set of tests, or not rigorous enough. Again, just look at the series of questions put in the four or fifth point. * in reference to the second, JKD is somewhat likened to a mirror of SELF reflection. With this in mind, the reflection I believe should be that of a serious venture, involving a great deal of deep analysis, as to what works, what doesn't, and why what doesn't work, doesn't work; furthermore, what can I do to remedy the situaton of it not working. To use a football analogy by the great 49ers coach bill walsh: "sometimes you have to fully develop an idea before you scrap it.

First, pick up The Straight Lead by Teri Tom. Despite the stuff written politics wise, it's a good read pertaining to the backbone of punching in JKD. It's actually, to me and those who do this art and have been doing this art for years, the first real book on JKD. Second, about what is concrete about JKD, read my last couple of posts where I outline JKD as heavily INFLUENCED by Western Boxing, Fencing, and to a degree Gung Fu. There are four or five punches, and three or four basic kicks. In addition, these punches and kicks are supplemented by joint locks and immobilizations. More importantly however, is the involvement of simple, yet intricate pieces of footwork that need to be mastered . Without the onguard position, footwork, and the understanding of the straight lead, you can't do JKD. It's that clearcut. Third, about Bruce having one official student, that's bogus. I don't know where you get your information from, but Bruce had way more than one student and I'm not just talking the Los Angeles phase, but the other two phases, Seattle and Oakland. Thanks to the internet, you can find those people listed on various sites done by those who did their research into this. For that, I'm indebted to them. Fourth about the mixing or adding of techniques, you can't do that freely as you have to run it through a series of litmus tests: First and foremost, does it fit the onguard position, two, how much does it deviate from the onguard position, and three can it retain the same effectiveness as it did from its previous structure, and if not, can you do what you can that will allow you to make such a thing happen? Fifth, in addressing the fourth point, why would you worry about mixing stuff if you haven't really, truly mastered something as simple as the onguard position, footwork, the lead straight - which involves plenty of things, such as the idea of hand before foot, body alignment, all tying this stuff in a precise manner as to harness the utmost power possible for the human body - something Bruce was more interested in than styles themselves. That's why he didn't believe in styles, for him it was about the human body, and for him, the best was the onguard position and the things contained in them, the tools, the footwork, etc.

JKD is anything but mixed techniques. Bruce had a definite body of knowledge, a definite system, a progression and direction regarding combat. Any effort to pare it down to such a definition other than what i just stated, is to undermine Bruce's body of technical, principle, and philosophical work.

actually, JKD is based heavily from Western Boxing and Fencing; the gung fu aspects are in the kicking and subtle principles here and there. Other than that, terms like broken rhythm, attacking on riposte, counter-time, etc comes from fencing. Boxing wise, many of the hand strikes were inspired by the old school boxers Jack Dempsey, Jim Driscoll and Edwin Haislet.

Get Teri Tom's book on the Straightlead, that will allow you and others to get the gist of JKD, as it is indeed a martial art of its own, very darn capable of standing on its OWN two feet.

Provide you have the right equipment, you can go full contact; but yes, sparring with respect to training the art of JKD, is a REQUIREMENT.

The kicks we use are JKD kicks. Those being, side, hook, front snap, and inverted.

People have to keep in mind that the Tao was just an ACCUMULATION of Bruce's notes. Notes that weren't necessarily his, as he didn't have any intention of publishing his notes. There are some things that are useful, but you have to be quick to discern what isn't applicable to JKD.

the man is more important than the style. Think about that. And no, it doesn't mean that the man can make up his own art form either, despite all the bickering that others may throw out there.

Nope, not too young.

now why can't people recognize this?

my ingredients - JKD.

JKD is a martial art. People tend to forget this. It's a martial art with its own philosophy, its own set of principles, and its own set of tools. At least from what I've gathered over the last couple years of training; talking with two Bruce Lee students, and having attended a seminar of another

Check him out. He's a good representation of what Dan taught in his backyard.

no one truly understanding jkd or good at it? I know a few groups that would be able to prove otherwise.

http://www.jkdwednite.com/europe.htm check him out.

actually, you just made my point for me . But you're right in that you don't need to be a buddhist to do karate, like you dont need to be buddhist to do or understand jkd to a good degree. But JKD philosophy is unlike say the philosophy in buddhism where as although its philosophy permeats throughout other avenues, it's primary avenue is that of JKD. There has to be a purpose as to the practice of your skill. A standard to your skill. There needs to be a philosophy nonetheless.

Venrix, I just got through your previous post and wanted to address some things mentioned. In regards to Bruce mastering this mastering that, Bruce if anything only had formal training in hung gar (for a short time) then went about learning wing chun seriously. Although it's been said that Bruce did take some Judo lessons, what % of it was included in JKD has yet to be seen by most JKD students. Bruce never went about training in several styles, for this is what he wasn't in agreement with. Bruce didn't want the accumulation of fixed knowledge or styles or systems. Bruce had his direction in terms of conducting himself in combat. Although Wing Chun, Boxing and Fencing have the greater influence in the creation of JKD and their influence being most evident, it was bruce's genius to take what he thought were the essence of such arts and made them fit his direction through modification. For the most part bruce sought to study , and I do mean study, not train; to find out how to counter these. On my JKD shirt, there's a diagram in the back talking about partiality, Fluidity, and Emptiness. In analyzing after my experience in jkd, i found that those three thuings are the three steps of cultivation in martial art. As far as the philosophy, principles, and techniques being separable, I'm not sure if that's the case becasue you need the principles to guide the tools, and the tools to express the principles. The thing with JKD is that the tools that were left by Bruce to his students were teh tools seen by Bruce that fit best the structure of JKD. So having said that, it's pretty clear that the two can't be separated.