jeet Kune do is a philosophy, and is not effective

[Lazy Scholar]

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.

[Kajukenbopr]

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.

finally, someone who can answer correctly and accurately.

Thank you for the post.

one last question- what do you think of people who claim to do jkd and use any kind of maneuver even if it becomes sloppy?

[Kajukenbopr]

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.

ok, then explain to me this "definite system". All i keep finding is be quick, intercept, dont let the opponent have time or room to move... if you read any good kung fu book(Baguazhang or Xing yi, to name 2) you will find the same advice in other words. i have seen most jkd train different from each other, and if you incorporate more stuff than what was trained for originally, you are in fact mixing techniques. i dont see anything wrong with mixing techniques as long as you can make it logical and effective.

And I got another question: if Bruce Lee only had one official student in his life: why did that student want to incorporate what he had been taught as something that would work for all other students? if jkd is designed to work for everyone, you would think the person would modify it to fit them. I'm curious because I dont have anything concrete to call jkd other than philosophy.

You make many valid points. I would like to think of JKD as a phase one reaches after a relatively long time of training in his chosen martial art, where he will take what works for him and disgard the rest. That is make a given style his own.

However, this concept was not invented by Bruce Lee, furthermore, it has existed in traditional martial arts for ages. In my opinion that Bruce Lee just invented the name, Jeet Kune Do and aimed to, shall we say, cut corners, so that instead of mastering a style and then making it your own, you just started to make it your own from day one, using various combinations of martial arts.

Wether everyone agrees with the Bruce Lee approach is another discussion.

It is a fact though that nowadays there are many, many martial artists that take similar approaches to their training eg. The cross training/mixed martial arts craze. Some were inspired by Bruce Lee and some were not.

people should be careful to realize that bruce was an expert in Wing Chun and trained in it for years before attempting to learn from other arts- which he did not adopt fully as Lazy Scholar mentions: just took from them the approaches to adapt the knowledge he already had.

[Lazy Scholar]

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.

[Kajukenbopr]

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.

I ask because a friend of mine has a "JKD" video, but the material presented looks more like a streetfighter that just picked up a few moves from a book or video... sloppy and painfully unreal.

But thanks for clearing that up for me

[Arys]

I just wanted to mention that Bruce Lee was "good" at Wing Chun, but he was not an expert. He never finished learning all that Wing Chun had to offer because he moved off to the US in search of something more before Ip Man could even teach him the final form. Also, some of the traps and such that JKD schools teach are derived from Wing Chun, but arent nearly as effective. Im not here to bash JKD, because I myself take it, but thats that : D

[kangaroo]

JKD still has a set layout. While it does assume formlessness, it does not mean there is no form. There is form to the way of thinking, just not form to individual way of techniques.

Just because someone is doing bits and pieces from different arts doesn't mean they are doing JKD.

[bushido_man96]

I think that Lee based many of his ideas and concepts off what he learned in Wing Chun. He obviously had the most experience in that style. However, he did do very well in incorporating other ideas, concepts, etc. into what became his style.

To say that he "never finished" Wing Chun is kind of a moot point. How many of us will ever be "finished" with our own given styles?

[kangaroo]

So true! There is no such thing as a finish as far as I'm concerned, but I guess that depends on what you think is the objective of studying the art.

[bushido_man96]

Another thought that I had about Bruce Lee's training goals: I don't think he was concerned about "finishing" a style, or being a "Wing Chun guy," per se. I think he was concerned about fighting, and he trained as he though would best prepare him for fighting.