You’re just jealous his kung fu is greater than yours.
I once heard he shat a brick just to prove his intestinal fortitude.
My esteemed colleagues have blurry photos of him doing this equivalent to those found in ghost story shows but they assure me they are legitimate.
[quote]No-Gi wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
Joe Lewis has also stated that Lee was the quickest (not exactly the same as fastest) man to ever stand in front of him. Keep in mind that Lewis has stood in front of other boxing greats like Ali and Sugar Ray Robinson to name a few.
Joe Lewis is unquestionably the real deal, but keep in mind that the guys you’re comparing him to are a lot bigger than Lee. Lighter guys do tend to be faster.
There comes a point when it is hard to separate myth from reality. The Bruce Lee legend is way past that point, he reaches near demigod status with some.
Anecdotal evidence of his speed combined with the assumption he would have trained really hard is not enough to sway me. I understand what you guys are saying, I just don’t think there’s any solid evidence to support it.
It’s all just way to shady for me. If we had record of him in boxing or kickboxing; or video recordings of fights(do these exist?), there would be at least something to base off of.
My part in this started in response to ZeusNathan’s “1st Ever” post, and OMC claiming
OMC wrote:
Lee’s physical abilities were on a whole different level to even modern day fighters…noone was faster. The core of what I’m saying is that these statements are wrong, I’m not saying he wasn’t fast, I’m just saying it is too much to claim that his “physical abilities”(note the plural, as in not just speed) were on a whole different level.
A whole different level is strong wording. It means there is no comparison, it is apples and oranges, they are on different levels. To take that as fact is silly, and no parade of fighters will convince me otherwise. He finished his post off that Lee would be the #1 P4P in the world. He’s being crowned on the basis of quotes from colleagues and his work ethics. I don’t buy it.
[/quote]
Well NO-GI I certainly don’t disagree with most of what your saying. Its all technically correct apart from trying to discredit Joe Lewis’s statements based on weight…it makes no sense. He said it…end of story.
Also the evidence of Lee’s speed is not anecdotal…its engraved on film for all time, and I don’t mean his movies. There’s plenty of training footage out there.
Your correct to say that none of this is a “guarantee” of success but were we differ (I think) is that I (and coincedently Bas Rutten in the latest episode of Inside MMA) believe that he more than likely would have been a huge force due to everything I listed above.
Again I’m not saying that the Bruce Lee of 1970 would have p’owned all…rather that if he was of this time of MMA. He would have spanked a LOT of ass.
[quote]No-Gi wrote:
Joe Lewis is unquestionably the real deal, but keep in mind that the guys you’re comparing him to are a lot bigger than Lee. Lighter guys do tend to be faster.
[/quote]
True. Though I believe Lewis has stood in front of quite a few smaller fighters as well. I’ll have to ask him when I train with him again this summer.
Also agreed, and I am by no means saying that the guy was invincible or super human. Just that he was a serious martial artist who developed his skills to quite a high degree. I’m mostly responding to the notion that he was just an actor. He wasn’t.
Well, I’ve personally witnessed Lewis’s speed first hand and he himself admits that Lee was faster than him. So, for me at least the anecdotal evidence is pretty substantiated. He also DID train really hard, it’s just that during his lifetime the combative arts had not evolved to the point they have today.
If you still disagree that he would have been a top featherweight, then so be it. We all seem to agree that it’s all just speculation either way.
I know that he won a boxing tournament while in China (can’t remember the exact tournament or context) using a combination of boxing and WC, this was also prior to him coming to the states and really going in his own direction training wise.
And prior to his development of some of the very effective principles which he later taught to Lewis, Norris, Stone and other students who successfully utilized them in competition.
I’ve also seen a video which is supposedly him fighting on a rooftop in china (though I’ve also heard some say that it was not Lee, but Wong Sheng Leung).
Yeah, he was far from the “1st ever”. I was actually thinking about Pankration as well when I read that. I would also agree that it’s impossible to say that his physical abilities were on a whole different level to modern fighters, but I will say that at least his striking and footwork was most likely at least on par with modern day MMA fighters.
Much of what made him so fast was not that his hand speed so much, but his understanding of correct mechanics and footwork speed.
Well I don’t disagree with that. I will say that he developed and mastered certain tactics/principles that I rarely if ever see MMA fighters use, which are extremely effective and might give him an advantage over his opponents on the feet. But I agree that crowning him #1 P4P based on speculation is stretching it a bit.
[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
I’m mostly responding to the notion that he was just an actor. He wasn’t.
[/quote]
You are 100% correct, I misspoke, or mis-typed as it were. Other than that, not much to say about your post.
Now there are a lot of misconceptions going on around here.
For starters, I think guys here can achieve 60% of his speed by learning to jerk the elbow efficiently enough (though your joints will hurt sooner or later)
As someone pointed out, Jujutsu was a system used which incorporated striking, grappling and locking but the thing is…
Jujutsu was created with the intent of war, during the 20th century, Moritei Ureshiba and Jigaro Kano started what could be non war or more day to day versions of martial arts, though Aikido and Judo both had only grappling aspects to them while shotokan karate had only striking.
What Bruce Lee did was nothing other than subtract and simplify, which is a great thing really. He pawed way for martial arts to be efficient enough for people not necessarily with a killing intent.
Complete martial arts can be seen in so many forms, especially baguazhang, snake fist, tiger claw but the thing is for a random woman to master these to defend herself in a street fight is definitely rare if not impossible given that the times have changed so much.
Bruce Lee struck the balance by emphasizing on training, simpler forms of striking, locking and grappling. I will admit the random kickboxer or karate or even MMA guy will get their asses drilled if they fight guys trained in baguazhang, xing i or even traditional jujutsu or kempo but the thing is the people who have mastered the authentic arts are very rare and much of the ancient arts were war purpose so at times it just doesn’t make sense to take 10 years of your life to master Tai Chi Chuan.
Just my humble insight,
-Vinesh.
[quote]vineshway wrote:
What Bruce Lee did was nothing other than subtract and simplify, which is a great thing really. He pawed way for martial arts to be efficient enough for people not necessarily with a killing intent.
[/quote]
Pugilism (boxing) has been around for centuries, as has wrestling. Both are designed to be used as sport. Both are based on simplicity and effectiveness (there are only really 4 punches in boxing). Lee’s greatest contribution was bringing the MA into the limelight through his films. Yes, I also believe that he was an iconoclast and changed the way many people thought about the MA. But efficiency in combative arts has been around for a long time.
Can’t argue with that.
[quote]
I will admit the random kickboxer or karate or even MMA guy will get their asses drilled if they fight guys trained in baguazhang, xing i or even traditional jujutsu or kempo but the thing is the people who have mastered the authentic arts are very rare and much of the ancient arts were war purpose so at times it just doesn’t make sense to take 10 years of your life to master Tai Chi Chuan.
-Vinesh. [/quote]
Do you really believe that first sentence?
If you mean that a weekend warrior kickboxer/MMA/karate guy will get tooled on by a person who has been training in a traditional art for their entire life (and were lucky enough to actually train in a non watered down version of the art), then yeah you’re probably right.
If however you are talking about equal experience, time training, size and athletic ability, then I’d disagree. I don’t have anything against internal arts like Baguazhang, Xing Yi, or Tai Chi, but there is nothing inherently superior about them when compared to arts like Kickboxing or MMA and generally speaking those arts don’t have anywhere near the emphasis on physical preparation (strength training and endurance training) as more “modern” arts.
[quote]vineshway wrote:
Now there are a lot of misconceptions going on around here.
For starters, I think guys here can achieve 60% of his speed by learning to jerk the elbow efficiently enough (though your joints will hurt sooner or later)
As someone pointed out, Jujutsu was a system used which incorporated striking, grappling and locking but the thing is…
Jujutsu was created with the intent of war, during the 20th century, Moritei Ureshiba and Jigaro Kano started what could be non war or more day to day versions of martial arts, though Aikido and Judo both had only grappling aspects to them while shotokan karate had only striking.
What Bruce Lee did was nothing other than subtract and simplify, which is a great thing really. He pawed way for martial arts to be efficient enough for people not necessarily with a killing intent.
Complete martial arts can be seen in so many forms, especially baguazhang, snake fist, tiger claw but the thing is for a random woman to master these to defend herself in a street fight is definitely rare if not impossible given that the times have changed so much.
Bruce Lee struck the balance by emphasizing on training, simpler forms of striking, locking and grappling. I will admit the random kickboxer or karate or even MMA guy will get their asses drilled if they fight guys trained in baguazhang, xing i or even traditional jujutsu or kempo but the thing is the people who have mastered the authentic arts are very rare and much of the ancient arts were war purpose so at times it just doesn’t make sense to take 10 years of your life to master Tai Chi Chuan.
Just my humble insight,
-Vinesh. [/quote]
Your whole post is a gigantic misconception.
[quote]vineshway wrote:
I will admit the random kickboxer or karate or even MMA guy will get their asses drilled if they fight guys trained in baguazhang, xing i or even traditional jujutsu or kempo but the thing is the people who have mastered the authentic arts are very rare and much of the ancient arts were war purpose so at times it just doesn’t make sense to take 10 years of your life to master Tai Chi Chuan.
Just my humble insight,
-Vinesh. [/quote]
This is the kind of silly shit that should be corrected by a simply viewing of one MMA event. People have this hilarious assumption that these “real” masters who would destroy a guy like Fedor, Anderson Silva or GSP, exist. Its scary that you just take it as a fact that the baguazhang guy would tear it up. Honestly if the stuff worked that well. MMA guys would remove the mysticism and start copying it.
no one really understands the significance of bruce’s accomplishments! his hybrid system “jkd” was inducted into the kyoshu federation and was given its own flag and lineage, thus putting lee’s system in the likes with tai-chi and h-singi! but i guess this is not a big deal, since he was just an actor and all. there is really no comparison to this matter since his own philosophy “using no way as way” would inhibit his “true” form from mma competition. now, if it were Vale-Tudo Rules, my money would always have been with Mr. LEE!
[quote]No-Gi wrote:
vineshway wrote:
I will admit the random kickboxer or karate or even MMA guy will get their asses drilled if they fight guys trained in baguazhang, xing i or even traditional jujutsu or kempo but the thing is the people who have mastered the authentic arts are very rare and much of the ancient arts were war purpose so at times it just doesn’t make sense to take 10 years of your life to master Tai Chi Chuan.
Just my humble insight,
-Vinesh.
This is the kind of silly shit that should be corrected by a simply viewing of one MMA event. People have this hilarious assumption that these “real” masters who would destroy a guy like Fedor, Anderson Silva or GSP, exist. Its scary that you just take it as a fact that the baguazhang guy would tear it up. Honestly if the stuff worked that well. MMA guys would remove the mysticism and start copying it. [/quote]
I agree completely. The only way these arts would definitely be better is if they used killing techniques or had no limits in terms of how you fight. If a fight has rules though there really isn’t anything special about the old arts.
Plenty of stuff is just retarded anyways even when its explained on shows like the “fight science” series. Sure mr. “authentic ninja master” may fight really well and have cool techniques such as punching a guy in his armpit to deliver a paralyzing blow to the nervous system or whatever but fighters today are just as good and don’t need moves that are very difficult to use or may not work.
Oh btw, best kung fu EVER:
[quote]Kliplemet wrote:
Ron Balicki > Bruce Lee
Ron Balicki Jun Fan JKD Jeet Kune Do Series DVD trailer - YouTube [/quote]
Uh…no
[quote]slimjim wrote:
vineshway wrote:
Now there are a lot of misconceptions going on around here.
For starters, I think guys here can achieve 60% of his speed by learning to jerk the elbow efficiently enough (though your joints will hurt sooner or later)
As someone pointed out, Jujutsu was a system used which incorporated striking, grappling and locking but the thing is…
Jujutsu was created with the intent of war, during the 20th century, Moritei Ureshiba and Jigaro Kano started what could be non war or more day to day versions of martial arts, though Aikido and Judo both had only grappling aspects to them while shotokan karate had only striking.
What Bruce Lee did was nothing other than subtract and simplify, which is a great thing really. He pawed way for martial arts to be efficient enough for people not necessarily with a killing intent.
Complete martial arts can be seen in so many forms, especially baguazhang, snake fist, tiger claw but the thing is for a random woman to master these to defend herself in a street fight is definitely rare if not impossible given that the times have changed so much.
Bruce Lee struck the balance by emphasizing on training, simpler forms of striking, locking and grappling. I will admit the random kickboxer or karate or even MMA guy will get their asses drilled if they fight guys trained in baguazhang, xing i or even traditional jujutsu or kempo but the thing is the people who have mastered the authentic arts are very rare and much of the ancient arts were war purpose so at times it just doesn’t make sense to take 10 years of your life to master Tai Chi Chuan.
Just my humble insight,
-Vinesh.
Your whole post is a gigantic misconception.[/quote]
Well Aikido definitely HAS atemi (striking) and I’m pretty sure Judo (the martial art Not the sport) has too (Goshin kata? sorry but my memory is a bit fuzzy; bound to be it ~15years since I went on the mat).
Bruce got me into weights he was and is a very inspirational guy.
He was the best martial artist of his time but don’t forget a martial artist and a fighter/scrapper are totally different.
Also as a quick notation in the book the art of expressing the human body Linda Lee Cadwell has said Bruce didn’t pay as much attention to his nutrition and he did his weights this isn’t to say he didn’t eat good he did… But he even had the occasional McDonalds.
Also it may take some of your interest that when he competed in western boxing before his best ever shape he knocked one of his opponents out in 3 seconds.
yeah - Mike Tyson became the champion of the world in less than 19 seconds. Bruce was impressive no doubt. He questioned convention and tried to simplify/improve. The sign of any artist working to make his craft stronger. An individual - certainly. Unique - not exactly.
The thing is most people today who teach bagua or tai chi chuan suck big time.
See, for every martial art there is some initial purpose and you have to train with regard to that purpose.
These days you don’t NEED to kill, people have grown weaker over the ages and self defence in the form of kickboxing can be effective to DEFEND yourself.
What I am talking about are the arts designed to execute. The reason why those arts can play over modern MMA is because when a MMA fighter trains, his intent is sports competition not to kill.
As for someone’s comment on ninjutsu. You can say ninjutsu consists of several arts, what you are referring to could be Budo Taijutsu.
There is nothing wrong with ninjutsu other than it being a system designed for espionage, stealth… the training coincided with other aspects of ninjutsu such as horse riding, swimming and some of the strikes were partially created with regard to even the silliest of things in the modern world so if someone is trained in authentic ninjutsu, he is stupid.
the thing ninjutsu shows however is martial symplification and evolution, ninjutsu was just jujutsu simplified or changed to some extent.
Of course, a direct comparison with MMA guys is hard, I do what you can call traditional jujutsu but I am sure MMA guys will whoop my ass.
However, I think if the training systems were as intact as say 300 years ago, I think the guys then could whip the current MMA guys.
Just my point of view.
[quote]vineshway wrote:
Of course, a direct comparison with MMA guys is hard, I do what you can call traditional jujutsu but I am sure MMA guys will whoop my ass.
However, I think if the training systems were as intact as say 300 years ago, I think the guys then could whip the current MMA guys.
Just my point of view.[/quote]
Then why train in what you consider a crappy watered down art. BTW I disagree about the guys 300 years ago, training, techniques, and nutrition have all advanced leaps and bounds.
Because I know I have a long way to go, I may not look like it but I have taken down boxers, kickboxers, judo guys without too much of an effort.
Of course I have been knocked out by boxers and MMA guys too, at the end of the day it depends who you are fighting.
But I believe boxing, kickboxing can be explored in a year, MMA in 3, I been into traditional stuff much longer and its still a long way to go.
[quote]vineshway wrote:
Of course I have been knocked out by boxers and MMA guys too, at the end of the day it depends who you are fighting.
[/quote]
Very true.
[quote]
But I believe boxing, kickboxing can be explored in a year, MMA in 3, I been into traditional stuff much longer and its still a long way to go.[/quote]
No freaking way! Explored? What does that even mean? One can “explore” traditional arts in a month’s time, it doesn’t mean that they’ll be anywhere near mastering them.
Most boxing coaches will tell you it takes around 3-5 years to train a fighter, and that’s only using punches. Kickboxing takes longer as you also must master kicks, knees, (elbows depending on the types of competitions you’re looking to get into), clinch fighting, and possibly takedowns (if you are getting into San Shou).
MMA takes yet even longer. You must learn basically everything that kickboxers learn, plus jiu-jitsu and wrestling. Jiu-Jitsu and wrestling will probably take you 10 years to really become proficient at. So, you’re looking at a very substantial amount of time training in less “traditional” arts than you are suggesting.
[quote]vineshway wrote:
These days you don’t NEED to kill, people have grown weaker over the ages and self defence in the form of kickboxing can be effective to DEFEND yourself.
[/quote]
Sorry dude, but you are living in a fantasy world if you think that people are any less dangerous these days than they were 300 years ago. Now, they’ve just got better weapons to kill you with.
True. But that doesn’t mean that he/she can’t still use what they learn to kill you. A rear naked choke can be fatal if held for long enough. And most MMA people also learn “bar chokes”, which are most certainly fatal if done with that intent. A double leg takedown which would possibly knock the wind out of you on the mat/in the ring can be fatal if done on concrete. MMA/boxers/kickboxers all practice developing accuracy in their strikes, so they could most likely simply aim for potentially fatal targets.
Now I’m not saying that some traditional arts aren’t also very effective. But unless you are talking about weapons arts (which you’ve also got modern versions of which are also very effective), then traditional arts are not superior to more modern arts in terms of killing.
I’ve done some ninjutsu before and while it’s actual combative effectiveness wouldn’t be on the top of my list it does teach some very beneficial skills.
[quote]
Of course, a direct comparison with MMA guys is hard, I do what you can call traditional jujutsu but I am sure MMA guys will whoop my ass.
However, I think if the training systems were as intact as say 300 years ago, I think the guys then could whip the current MMA guys.
Just my point of view.[/quote]
I’ve done some traditional jujutsu as well (have had the opportunity to train with Michael DePasquale Jr.) and it is very effective. So understand I’m not trying to put down the traditional arts. All I’m saying is that one should use what works, and that very philosophy is more or less the basis behind most good MMA schools.
[quote]Kliplemet wrote:
No-Gi wrote:
Kliplemet wrote:
Ron Balicki > Bruce Lee
Uh…no
Uh…yes
At least he actually had some fights[/quote]
Oh in that case, if that’s all that matters then… hmm Ron Balicki is listed as a 1-1 MMA record, neither of them significant.
If having fights makes Ron Balicki better despite Bruce’s theoretical and philosophical contributions to fighting, then I give you Shannon “the Cannon” Ritch. By your logic. Shannon Ritch > Ron Balicki > Bruce Lee.
http://www.sherdog.com/Fightfinder/fightfinder.asp?FighterID=328
Obviously if 2 fights is good then Shannon Ritch is a legend!!!