Is Jeet Kune Do a Legit System?

[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
I don’t think anyone who actually respects bruce lee’s teachings would call it a legitimate system.

Dan Inosanto IIRC had a long spiel a while back about how there was dissension among the students after Lee’s death because he (Dan) was trying to incorporate new methods that he had learned from other styles (I believe the example was Thai style kicking) and his students weren’t having a bar of it because “it didnt look like bruce lee” and he’s stuck there flabbergasted because evolving and taking other concepts was exactly what Bruce wanted to do.

Really MMA is the embodiment of what JKD as a concept is IMO. A fighter like GSP, takes what works for him, discards what doesn’t. He’s not stuck in the trappings of “styles”.

Most of the JKD schools today seem, at least to me, a bunch of mcdojos trying to replicate what Bruce Lee did on a film set.[/quote]

Good post.

Bruce encouraged his students to call their fighting arts whatever they wanted. That’s one of the reasons that Joe Lewis decided not to call what he did JKD, he didn’t want to deal with all the politics or feel limited by the confines of JKD (or at least what other people think it is) which freed him up to include or remove anything that he felt worked better or didn’t work as well. Several of Joe’s black belts (my instructors included) have done the same with their systems.

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

If your primary goal is self defense/street survival though, you might want to look for something that is geared specifically towards that goal. Krav Maga, Haganah, Dynamic Combat Method, Chu Fen Do, Lysak’s Sento Method, and iCAT (to name a few) are all systems designed specifically for real world self defense/worst case scenario training. You will still learn some boxing/striking, and grappling (judo, wrestling, BJJ) skills, but the focus will be on dealing with things like surprise/ambush attacks, weapons defense and deployment, and probably most importantly IMO legal and moral concerns, verbal and postural self defense tactics, and cerebral self defense strategies.
[/quote]

I generally agree with this Sento. Almost all of my training these days is in the “RMA” area and I value this type of training immensely. However, it has been my experience that the people who have the easiest time becoming most effective in these types of systems have at least some kind of a decent foundation in dedicated study to a more established combat sport/art.

Sometimes I think that, given only a couple of days a week to train, trying to incorporate all the things we do in “RMA” (don’t really like that term but oh well…) while achieving a reasonable level of mechanical proficiency in actual techniques is a bit difficult at best. On the other hand, if you already know how to do something (i.e. box) at a passable level it gets easier and you are able to progress much faster. [/quote]

I’m not gonna argue that someone who has already developed a single arsenal to a high degree isn’t gonna be able to pick up other similar skill sets more easily, or even be able to devote more time to developing other arsenals. But to be honest, there is also a lot of time wasted while doing so learning skills that do not translate to real world self defense well and instead could have spent that time developing more appropriate skills like weapons deployment and defense.

I think it again comes down to who is instructing you and why you are learning what you’re learning. We regularly bring in top notch instructors in wrestling, kickboxing, boxing, BJJ, Arnis, and numerous other martial arts/combat sports because training in those systems can develop specific attributes that are useful in self defense scenarios. But the truth is that other than personal development, spending a considerable amount of time and energy on any one of these individual combat arts wouldn’t be the best use of time for someone concerned primarily with self protection training. A lot of the skills they teach also need to be altered/appropriated, or even completely discarded for real world application.

My personal opinion is that with minimal training time the best use of time would be spent on training things like dealing with ambush/surprise attacks, verbal and postural self defense skills, some very basic striking skills utilizing durable weapons (like palms, hammer fists, forearms, knees, and stomping kicks), basic takedown defense, and some basic weapons skills (use and defensive strategies) than on just boxing or grappling.[/quote]

You’re probably right overall and, as usual, you articulate your reasons very well. This is basically how our training has been structured by smarter guys than me, so who am I to presume to reinvent the wheel? I think part of my bias is because when things start to go sideways I’m pretty quick to fall back on boxing (palm strikes are still not my default despite extensive retraining) and grappling (with some knees and elbows and hammerfists added), which I find to be fairly productive for me. I suppose, on reflection this is probably because this is where most of my training background was pre-RMA so it’s where my competence and confidence lies. Obviously this doesn’t make it the most optimal approach.

As has been discussed at length in other “which system?” threads, I completely agree that when it comes to staying safe the cerebral/strategic/pre-contact side of things is likely of far greater value than the technique/tactics/hands-on side. It’s not as much fun though…

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

If your primary goal is self defense/street survival though, you might want to look for something that is geared specifically towards that goal. Krav Maga, Haganah, Dynamic Combat Method, Chu Fen Do, Lysak’s Sento Method, and iCAT (to name a few) are all systems designed specifically for real world self defense/worst case scenario training. You will still learn some boxing/striking, and grappling (judo, wrestling, BJJ) skills, but the focus will be on dealing with things like surprise/ambush attacks, weapons defense and deployment, and probably most importantly IMO legal and moral concerns, verbal and postural self defense tactics, and cerebral self defense strategies.
[/quote]

I generally agree with this Sento. Almost all of my training these days is in the “RMA” area and I value this type of training immensely. However, it has been my experience that the people who have the easiest time becoming most effective in these types of systems have at least some kind of a decent foundation in dedicated study to a more established combat sport/art.

Sometimes I think that, given only a couple of days a week to train, trying to incorporate all the things we do in “RMA” (don’t really like that term but oh well…) while achieving a reasonable level of mechanical proficiency in actual techniques is a bit difficult at best. On the other hand, if you already know how to do something (i.e. box) at a passable level it gets easier and you are able to progress much faster. [/quote]

I’m not gonna argue that someone who has already developed a single arsenal to a high degree isn’t gonna be able to pick up other similar skill sets more easily, or even be able to devote more time to developing other arsenals. But to be honest, there is also a lot of time wasted while doing so learning skills that do not translate to real world self defense well and instead could have spent that time developing more appropriate skills like weapons deployment and defense.

I think it again comes down to who is instructing you and why you are learning what you’re learning. We regularly bring in top notch instructors in wrestling, kickboxing, boxing, BJJ, Arnis, and numerous other martial arts/combat sports because training in those systems can develop specific attributes that are useful in self defense scenarios. But the truth is that other than personal development, spending a considerable amount of time and energy on any one of these individual combat arts wouldn’t be the best use of time for someone concerned primarily with self protection training. A lot of the skills they teach also need to be altered/appropriated, or even completely discarded for real world application.

My personal opinion is that with minimal training time the best use of time would be spent on training things like dealing with ambush/surprise attacks, verbal and postural self defense skills, some very basic striking skills utilizing durable weapons (like palms, hammer fists, forearms, knees, and stomping kicks), basic takedown defense, and some basic weapons skills (use and defensive strategies) than on just boxing or grappling.[/quote]

You’re probably right overall and, as usual, you articulate your reasons very well. This is basically how our training has been structured by smarter guys than me, so who am I to presume to reinvent the wheel? I think part of my bias is because when things start to go sideways I’m pretty quick to fall back on boxing (palm strikes are still not my default despite extensive retraining) and grappling (with some knees and elbows and hammerfists added), which I find to be fairly productive for me. I suppose, on reflection this is probably because this is where most of my training background was pre-RMA so it’s where my competence and confidence lies. Obviously this doesn’t make it the most optimal approach.

As has been discussed at length in other “which system?” threads, I completely agree that when it comes to staying safe the cerebral/strategic/pre-contact side of things is likely of far greater value than the technique/tactics/hands-on side. It’s not as much fun though…[/quote]

Really good comments and excellent discussion. Although my current assignment is CBQ, which emphasizes weapons and tactics to a greater degree than unarmed techiques, it has been my observation that the higher the stress level, the more a person will resort to large gross motor movenments, which ties in to what Devil dog was saying: learn a good basic foundation and build on more advanced training in the future.

You guys seem to be missing some fundamental points I am trying to make, For me even the topic of Jeet Kune Do is very fumbled… This is because of the issues of lineage; Dan used to be part of the Bruce Lee organization but got kicked out for using the trademark name in his school and with issues in the community, Dan teaches what is known as Jeet Kune Do concepts… It is basically teaching someone alot of different styles trying to get the core “element” out of each style but all you get is a fumbled fucking mess of way to many techniques and NO simplicity…

Jeet Kune Do the word itself is only a pointer or sign post you could say… It is not a style because it is the art of scientific street fighting without rigidity and structure… The problem regarding the whole practice is the amount of BS that is out there as I have mentioned 99% of so called JKD is not actually what it was intended to be, more along the lines of people practicing some form of either A. Wing Chung or B. Kick Boxing… It is not a going back and fourth chess piece type of fighting style…

The way of the intercepting fist… No way as way… etc… He used alot of philosophy but the problem is that certain terms get misunderstood and certain people are teaching things and knocking it off as Jeet Kune Do when in reality it is something entirely different.

There are many people that were taught by bruce but not all of them received the same amount of training and time under Bruce when he was alive, Some also did not go on to teach what was shown to them but rather what they wanted to do or their take on certain things such as Dan…
Some people that taught mainly what was shown by Bruce are Ted Wong, Jesse Glover, Leo Fong, Taky Kimura, and a few others… Just because someone took a few of his classes when he was alive does not mean they are teaching the same art the way it was meant to be represented…

Again as I said their are only a very small few portion of people on this planet that train in the art in the way it is meant to be most notably Tommy Carruthers…

Some say JKD would have evolved to MMA of today but that is also incorrect, Yes Bruce said take what is useful and disregard what is useless but the whole art is based around daily DECREASE, Bruce also had already condensed everything down to its simplest form and found what works best using modified wing chun, boxing, and fencing the three main elements of JKD, yes there is other stuff thrown in such as side kicks that was taught to him by a karate ka and a few other things but its ALREADY down to its simplest form …

Jeet Kune Do also has no formal rules or regulations it is vicious and meant for the street, the two main targets are the eyes and groin and it is NOT something you can practice in the ring because there is no point in using something that is illegal… You want to train adhering to certain rules and regulations then you train in the way that best prepares you for that. The stance in JKD for example is similar to that of a fencer where your kick and punch 80% of the time with your lead hand and foot and your set so you do not telagraph with your groin guarded… obviously this stance does not work as well in the ring because the means of defense such as guarding the groin are totally not needed…

A JKD person fighting a boxing match against a boxer with boxing rules is gonna get his ass kicked because thats not what it is about… Like I said in the beginning though most JKD practitioners are complete rubbish because they are learning a bunch of watered down fancy kick box dancing crap and would get killed by most boxers, karate kas, etc…

It is very hard to find real representation of the way this art is meant to be represented and even discussing it you usually just run around in circles in a jumbled mess such as my post portrays lol… I practice the art the way it was meant to be done under Tommy and I am not an armchair fighter so usually I like to rather show people whatsup rather then type and sit behind a keyboard where people can just call BS on my level of expertise and if I am even any of a good fighter at all… Maybe I will post some vids soon to better show what it is about…

Here is a buddy of mine doing some bag work, light simple stuff but he is now under the same instruction as me, He used train under Dan Inasonto at his school in Marina Del Ray a few years back and got his advanced certification by him but it did not make him much better at the art itself instead he just learned a shit ton of savate, boxing, muay thai, and various other styles most of which were watered down and alot of moves, stances, etc… but way too much info and way too complicated. He is very sharpened at JKD though and is a good example of how the dynamics looks and works…

[media][media]

Well if someone lets me know how I can post this correctly then yall can see lol

[quote]idaho wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

If your primary goal is self defense/street survival though, you might want to look for something that is geared specifically towards that goal. Krav Maga, Haganah, Dynamic Combat Method, Chu Fen Do, Lysak’s Sento Method, and iCAT (to name a few) are all systems designed specifically for real world self defense/worst case scenario training. You will still learn some boxing/striking, and grappling (judo, wrestling, BJJ) skills, but the focus will be on dealing with things like surprise/ambush attacks, weapons defense and deployment, and probably most importantly IMO legal and moral concerns, verbal and postural self defense tactics, and cerebral self defense strategies.
[/quote]

I generally agree with this Sento. Almost all of my training these days is in the “RMA” area and I value this type of training immensely. However, it has been my experience that the people who have the easiest time becoming most effective in these types of systems have at least some kind of a decent foundation in dedicated study to a more established combat sport/art.

Sometimes I think that, given only a couple of days a week to train, trying to incorporate all the things we do in “RMA” (don’t really like that term but oh well…) while achieving a reasonable level of mechanical proficiency in actual techniques is a bit difficult at best. On the other hand, if you already know how to do something (i.e. box) at a passable level it gets easier and you are able to progress much faster. [/quote]

I’m not gonna argue that someone who has already developed a single arsenal to a high degree isn’t gonna be able to pick up other similar skill sets more easily, or even be able to devote more time to developing other arsenals. But to be honest, there is also a lot of time wasted while doing so learning skills that do not translate to real world self defense well and instead could have spent that time developing more appropriate skills like weapons deployment and defense.

I think it again comes down to who is instructing you and why you are learning what you’re learning. We regularly bring in top notch instructors in wrestling, kickboxing, boxing, BJJ, Arnis, and numerous other martial arts/combat sports because training in those systems can develop specific attributes that are useful in self defense scenarios. But the truth is that other than personal development, spending a considerable amount of time and energy on any one of these individual combat arts wouldn’t be the best use of time for someone concerned primarily with self protection training. A lot of the skills they teach also need to be altered/appropriated, or even completely discarded for real world application.

My personal opinion is that with minimal training time the best use of time would be spent on training things like dealing with ambush/surprise attacks, verbal and postural self defense skills, some very basic striking skills utilizing durable weapons (like palms, hammer fists, forearms, knees, and stomping kicks), basic takedown defense, and some basic weapons skills (use and defensive strategies) than on just boxing or grappling.[/quote]

You’re probably right overall and, as usual, you articulate your reasons very well. This is basically how our training has been structured by smarter guys than me, so who am I to presume to reinvent the wheel? I think part of my bias is because when things start to go sideways I’m pretty quick to fall back on boxing (palm strikes are still not my default despite extensive retraining) and grappling (with some knees and elbows and hammerfists added), which I find to be fairly productive for me. I suppose, on reflection this is probably because this is where most of my training background was pre-RMA so it’s where my competence and confidence lies. Obviously this doesn’t make it the most optimal approach.

As has been discussed at length in other “which system?” threads, I completely agree that when it comes to staying safe the cerebral/strategic/pre-contact side of things is likely of far greater value than the technique/tactics/hands-on side. It’s not as much fun though…[/quote]

Really good comments and excellent discussion. Although my current assignment is CBQ, which emphasizes weapons and tactics to a greater degree than unarmed techiques, it has been my observation that the higher the stress level, the more a person will resort to large gross motor movenments, which ties in to what Devil dog was saying: learn a good basic foundation and build on more advanced training in the future. [/quote]

Yes, gross motor skills don’t seem to deteriorate much with stress, but it’s also not true that fine motor skills cannot still be utilized under stress, they just take considerably more training. We organize skills into “simple effective” skills and “complex effective” skills. The basic foundational skills of any RMA should be simple effective, gross motor oriented minimal timing and judgement requirements, easily learned and retained, etc… There also needs to be more complex effective skills to learn as one progresses however which allow one to eventually deal with more challenging and skilled types of opponents. This is one of the things that separates RMA’s from “self defense” training courses. It is also an area that some RMA’s fall short and thus give the whole group a bad reputation among SMA (Sport Martial Arts) people.

Maybe upload the video to your T Nation profile, and then go from there.

[quote]cstratton2 wrote:
You guys seem to be missing some fundamental points I am trying to make, For me even the topic of Jeet Kune Do is very fumbled… This is because of the issues of lineage; Dan used to be part of the Bruce Lee organization but got kicked out for using the trademark name in his school and with issues in the community, Dan teaches what is known as Jeet Kune Do concepts… It is basically teaching someone alot of different styles trying to get the core “element” out of each style but all you get is a fumbled fucking mess of way to many techniques and NO simplicity…
[/quote]

And this is why none of the successful fighters who Bruce trained choose to call what they do JKD, there is so much ridiculous politics wrapped up with the name that it’s just not worth it to them. Besides the fact that while they cherish the time and friendship they had with Bruce and the knowledge that he passed on to them, they want their own legacy to be enough to legitimize their system without having to piggy back off of Bruce’s fame.

I don’t care what anyone tells you, Dan Inosanto trained personally with Bruce, was one of only 3 people who Bruce trusted to teach JKD, and was the only one of the 3 to be awarded a level 3 instructor status. Whether he has been “kicked out” of the organization after Bruce’s death is quite frankly inconsequential and in no way erases his history with Lee or diminishes his legitimacy as a JKD instructor.

I’ll agree that Inosanto loves the Filipino arts (largely due to his Filipino heritage) and has also branched out and sought instruction in other arts and areas that Bruce didn’t have a chance to ever experience (like his black belt in BJJ from JJ Machado). But do you honestly think that if Bruce hadn’t died an early death and were still alive today that his JKD would look exactly the same as it did at the time of his death? The man was constantly changing what his martial art looked like during his short life, do you really think he would have stopped when he was when he died? Do you really think he would not have incorporated more ground fighting into his system, or that he wouldn’t have adopted other proven effective techniques and tactics from other systems had he been exposed to them?

The first sentence I agree with, the rest seems contradictory. If JKD is no bound by the confines of being a “style”, then as long as someone is using the principles of JKD (like the various “ways of attack” for instance), then how can you say that what those people are practicing isn’t JKD? Cannot water take the form of any container that it is put into? You seem to be suggesting that only a specific shaped container can be JKD.

See above.

Again, see my first paragraph response. It is comical to say that Dan is not qualified to teach JKD. As far as them teaching their take on things…OF COURSE! Do you really think that Bruce didn’t realize that JKD would look different for a 150 lb 5’7" person such as himself than what a 300 lb 6’5" person? How about a person in a wheel chair? How about a 90 lb woman?

“Jeet Kune Do favors formlessness so that it can assume all forms and since Jeet Kune Do has no style, it can fit in with all styles. As a result, Jeet Kune Do utilizes all ways and is bound by none and, likewise, uses any techniques which serve its end.” -Bruce Lee from Tao of Jeet Kune Do page 12.

First, again do you really believe that Bruce would not have continued to evolve his system? Second, do you really believe that is all one needs to be a truly comprehensive martial artist? Third, do you really believe that all anyone needs is wing chun, boxing, and fencing?

And finally Bruce patterned his side kick from that of Joe Lewis’s, Linda Lee Caldwell announced at the JLFS research conference last year that they had found a bunch of diaries of Bruce’s (which had been previously unknown of) where he had made extensive notes on Joe’s side kick and fighting style prior to ever having worked with him.

Again, you seem to be ignoring the fact that Bruce personally trained Joe Lewis (who actually logged more personal time training with him than anyone else other than Ted Wong), Chuck Norris, and Mike Stone to fight in a ring (all of whom won pretty much every major competition and/or title available at the time). Joe Lewis actually put down “Jeet Kune Do” as his fighting style during his fight with Greg Baines (the first sanctioned full contact kickboxing match in US history) as well as several of his subsequent full contact fights. To say that JKD cannot be used effectively in a ring is to completely dismiss history.

Again, see above.

[quote]
It is very hard to find real representation of the way this art is meant to be represented and even discussing it you usually just run around in circles in a jumbled mess such as my post portrays lol… I practice the art the way it was meant to be done under Tommy and I am not an armchair fighter so usually I like to rather show people whatsup rather then type and sit behind a keyboard where people can just call BS on my level of expertise and if I am even any of a good fighter at all… Maybe I will post some vids soon to better show what it is about…[/quote]

Good for you, but telling others that they aren’t doing JKD simply because it doesn’t look exactly like what you do isn’t adding to your credibility any either.

This discussion is reason #2,232,112 that I just don’t care about anything resembling traditional martial arts anymore. Nobody asks what your trainer’s lineage is in a boxing gym, and the only belt that matters says, “Welterweight champion.”

Ugh. Sad that it gets to this. Lots of good shit goes down because of politics… especially when at it’s base, it’s as simple as, “Can the dude fight? Good, then he’s qualified to teach fighting.”

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
This discussion is reason #2,232,112 that I just don’t care about anything resembling traditional martial arts anymore. Nobody asks what your trainer’s lineage is in a boxing gym, and the only belt that matters says, “Welterweight champion.”

Ugh. Sad that it gets to this. Lots of good shit goes down because of politics… especially when at it’s base, it’s as simple as, “Can the dude fight? Good, then he’s qualified to teach fighting.” [/quote]

True. And that’s why I want to see this video of the JKD guy hitting the bag. I’ll bet something off a $1 menu (not including state tax) that it will either be shite, or look like boxing.

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]cstratton2 wrote:
You guys seem to be missing some fundamental points I am trying to make, For me even the topic of Jeet Kune Do is very fumbled… This is because of the issues of lineage; Dan used to be part of the Bruce Lee organization but got kicked out for using the trademark name in his school and with issues in the community, Dan teaches what is known as Jeet Kune Do concepts… It is basically teaching someone alot of different styles trying to get the core “element” out of each style but all you get is a fumbled fucking mess of way to many techniques and NO simplicity…
[/quote]

And this is why none of the successful fighters who Bruce trained choose to call what they do JKD, there is so much ridiculous politics wrapped up with the name that it’s just not worth it to them. Besides the fact that while they cherish the time and friendship they had with Bruce and the knowledge that he passed on to them, they want their own legacy to be enough to legitimize their system without having to piggy back off of Bruce’s fame.

I don’t care what anyone tells you, Dan Inosanto trained personally with Bruce, was one of only 3 people who Bruce trusted to teach JKD, and was the only one of the 3 to be awarded a level 3 instructor status. Whether he has been “kicked out” of the organization after Bruce’s death is quite frankly inconsequential and in no way erases his history with Lee or diminishes his legitimacy as a JKD instructor.

I’ll agree that Inosanto loves the Filipino arts (largely due to his Filipino heritage) and has also branched out and sought instruction in other arts and areas that Bruce didn’t have a chance to ever experience (like his black belt in BJJ from JJ Machado). But do you honestly think that if Bruce hadn’t died an early death and were still alive today that his JKD would look exactly the same as it did at the time of his death? The man was constantly changing what his martial art looked like during his short life, do you really think he would have stopped when he was when he died? Do you really think he would not have incorporated more ground fighting into his system, or that he wouldn’t have adopted other proven effective techniques and tactics from other systems had he been exposed to them?

The first sentence I agree with, the rest seems contradictory. If JKD is no bound by the confines of being a “style”, then as long as someone is using the principles of JKD (like the various “ways of attack” for instance), then how can you say that what those people are practicing isn’t JKD? Cannot water take the form of any container that it is put into? You seem to be suggesting that only a specific shaped container can be JKD.

See above.

Again, see my first paragraph response. It is comical to say that Dan is not qualified to teach JKD. As far as them teaching their take on things…OF COURSE! Do you really think that Bruce didn’t realize that JKD would look different for a 150 lb 5’7" person such as himself than what a 300 lb 6’5" person? How about a person in a wheel chair? How about a 90 lb woman?

“Jeet Kune Do favors formlessness so that it can assume all forms and since Jeet Kune Do has no style, it can fit in with all styles. As a result, Jeet Kune Do utilizes all ways and is bound by none and, likewise, uses any techniques which serve its end.” -Bruce Lee from Tao of Jeet Kune Do page 12.

First, again do you really believe that Bruce would not have continued to evolve his system? Second, do you really believe that is all one needs to be a truly comprehensive martial artist? Third, do you really believe that all anyone needs is wing chun, boxing, and fencing?

And finally Bruce patterned his side kick from that of Joe Lewis’s, Linda Lee Caldwell announced at the JLFS research conference last year that they had found a bunch of diaries of Bruce’s (which had been previously unknown of) where he had made extensive notes on Joe’s side kick and fighting style prior to ever having worked with him.

Again, you seem to be ignoring the fact that Bruce personally trained Joe Lewis (who actually logged more personal time training with him than anyone else other than Ted Wong), Chuck Norris, and Mike Stone to fight in a ring (all of whom won pretty much every major competition and/or title available at the time). Joe Lewis actually put down “Jeet Kune Do” as his fighting style during his fight with Greg Baines (the first sanctioned full contact kickboxing match in US history) as well as several of his subsequent full contact fights. To say that JKD cannot be used effectively in a ring is to completely dismiss history.

Again, see above.

[quote]
It is very hard to find real representation of the way this art is meant to be represented and even discussing it you usually just run around in circles in a jumbled mess such as my post portrays lol… I practice the art the way it was meant to be done under Tommy and I am not an armchair fighter so usually I like to rather show people whatsup rather then type and sit behind a keyboard where people can just call BS on my level of expertise and if I am even any of a good fighter at all… Maybe I will post some vids soon to better show what it is about…[/quote]

Good for you, but telling others that they aren’t doing JKD simply because it doesn’t look exactly like what you do isn’t adding to your credibility any either.[/quote]

You put up some good points man, what I am saying about Dan is that yes although he knows everything Bruce has taught but training with people under him they all said the same thing as you have mentioned most guys that trained under him do not teach what was shown to them but rather their own thing… As far as Jeet Kune Do in competition yes, It can work as in taking some core elements such as front lead, closest weapon nearest target, progressive indirect attack etc… But the things such as groin kicking, eye gouging, knee breaking… etc the main three targets cannot be utilized and you are left with just a few techniques from the fighting style… As far as ground game bruce did do alot of wrestling and added it in as you can see in enter the dragon… The reason more of it was not added again as you said we have no idea what would have happened after his death but what I can say based on my instruction from legit people is that it doesn’t work on the street, you start rolling around on the concrete with someone and your gonna get your head kicked in by one of their friends… The purpose of the art is simplicity in motion with daily decrease, instead of using 1000 different tools you have a few very well sharpened ones much like a boxer only has a few different types of strikes, as opposed to kempo which I trained in for 7 years. Never ignoring that Bruce taught and trained with a few competitive fighters and everything just that what it entails in entirety cannot be fully utilized when placed with restrictions… The only recognition I put with boxing, wing chung, and fencing is that it is the main elements that are derived from in Bruce’s art… Again though it is not about adding on and doing a thousand different martial arts takes away from the point of daily decrease and simplicity… You just end up running in circles when you train in everything under the sun the same as how it is applied to lifting… I am simply stating that nothing needs to be added only decreased and it is already in its simplest way… It is not a rigid martial art with structure it is just strictly scientific street fighting, what works on the street and using that… I may have wrote some contradictory info etc… Well I am by no means an expert on the history and legacy of Bruce, I know a decent amount about it but mainly I just train and practice in it and by no means should be regarded in an expert in the “history section” lol. I am simply a person who practices the art and am pretty proficient being placed under my Instructer who learned by the people who were trained by Bruce … Tommy who was trained by Jesse, Ted, Taky, Leo, etc…

Again just as fighting Irish said and I completely agree it is just too political of a topic and for me personally I just say what I know on the topic but it is always best left to actually just do it rather then discuss… Also of course thats the point I am trying to make in regards of my post… A person that teaches should be able to fight, my issue is that a lot of the people that are teaching Jeet Kune Do have absolute no practical experience and even most have never been in a situation where they have had to use it for real…

Here is the video hope the link works, again nothing too crazy just a simple heavy bag session a friend recorded, some simple strikes being thrown but has good form and tech and yeah it looks very “boxery” not the same as hitting a human body just some simple tools being thrown like front lead, hooks, kicks, etc…

Here is another one double ended bag

Attacking

Leg obstruction with follow up

Punching…

Here is one from an Italian seminar

.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
This discussion is reason #2,232,112 that I just don’t care about anything resembling traditional martial arts anymore. Nobody asks what your trainer’s lineage is in a boxing gym, and the only belt that matters says, “Welterweight champion.”
[/quote]

Well, that’s not entirely true, if a trainer or boxer trained under a really successful trainer or boxer themselves, then generally that person gains some credibility. Of course, that’s if we’re talking about seeking out a coach (which is not the same thing as asking whether someone can fight).

[quote]
Ugh. Sad that it gets to this. Lots of good shit goes down because of politics… especially when at it’s base, it’s as simple as, “Can the dude fight? Good, then he’s qualified to teach fighting.” [/quote]

That’s not necessarily true though. A great fighter does not necessarily make a great coach. In fact, the three greatest coaches of the 20th century (Ed Futch, Angelo Dundee, and Cus D Amato) were not successful fighters themselves. Conversely, very few previous great fighters go on to become highly successful boxing trainers. The two qualities aren’t mutually exclusive of course, but they are separate qualities nonetheless.

If I had the choice to train with Pacquiao or Roach, I’d pick Roach any day of the week. But you can bet that Pac would whoop him in a fight.

[quote]cstratton2 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]cstratton2 wrote:
You guys seem to be missing some fundamental points I am trying to make, For me even the topic of Jeet Kune Do is very fumbled… This is because of the issues of lineage; Dan used to be part of the Bruce Lee organization but got kicked out for using the trademark name in his school and with issues in the community, Dan teaches what is known as Jeet Kune Do concepts… It is basically teaching someone alot of different styles trying to get the core “element” out of each style but all you get is a fumbled fucking mess of way to many techniques and NO simplicity…
[/quote]

And this is why none of the successful fighters who Bruce trained choose to call what they do JKD, there is so much ridiculous politics wrapped up with the name that it’s just not worth it to them. Besides the fact that while they cherish the time and friendship they had with Bruce and the knowledge that he passed on to them, they want their own legacy to be enough to legitimize their system without having to piggy back off of Bruce’s fame.

I don’t care what anyone tells you, Dan Inosanto trained personally with Bruce, was one of only 3 people who Bruce trusted to teach JKD, and was the only one of the 3 to be awarded a level 3 instructor status. Whether he has been “kicked out” of the organization after Bruce’s death is quite frankly inconsequential and in no way erases his history with Lee or diminishes his legitimacy as a JKD instructor.

I’ll agree that Inosanto loves the Filipino arts (largely due to his Filipino heritage) and has also branched out and sought instruction in other arts and areas that Bruce didn’t have a chance to ever experience (like his black belt in BJJ from JJ Machado). But do you honestly think that if Bruce hadn’t died an early death and were still alive today that his JKD would look exactly the same as it did at the time of his death? The man was constantly changing what his martial art looked like during his short life, do you really think he would have stopped when he was when he died? Do you really think he would not have incorporated more ground fighting into his system, or that he wouldn’t have adopted other proven effective techniques and tactics from other systems had he been exposed to them?

The first sentence I agree with, the rest seems contradictory. If JKD is no bound by the confines of being a “style”, then as long as someone is using the principles of JKD (like the various “ways of attack” for instance), then how can you say that what those people are practicing isn’t JKD? Cannot water take the form of any container that it is put into? You seem to be suggesting that only a specific shaped container can be JKD.

See above.

Again, see my first paragraph response. It is comical to say that Dan is not qualified to teach JKD. As far as them teaching their take on things…OF COURSE! Do you really think that Bruce didn’t realize that JKD would look different for a 150 lb 5’7" person such as himself than what a 300 lb 6’5" person? How about a person in a wheel chair? How about a 90 lb woman?

“Jeet Kune Do favors formlessness so that it can assume all forms and since Jeet Kune Do has no style, it can fit in with all styles. As a result, Jeet Kune Do utilizes all ways and is bound by none and, likewise, uses any techniques which serve its end.” -Bruce Lee from Tao of Jeet Kune Do page 12.

First, again do you really believe that Bruce would not have continued to evolve his system? Second, do you really believe that is all one needs to be a truly comprehensive martial artist? Third, do you really believe that all anyone needs is wing chun, boxing, and fencing?

And finally Bruce patterned his side kick from that of Joe Lewis’s, Linda Lee Caldwell announced at the JLFS research conference last year that they had found a bunch of diaries of Bruce’s (which had been previously unknown of) where he had made extensive notes on Joe’s side kick and fighting style prior to ever having worked with him.

Again, you seem to be ignoring the fact that Bruce personally trained Joe Lewis (who actually logged more personal time training with him than anyone else other than Ted Wong), Chuck Norris, and Mike Stone to fight in a ring (all of whom won pretty much every major competition and/or title available at the time). Joe Lewis actually put down “Jeet Kune Do” as his fighting style during his fight with Greg Baines (the first sanctioned full contact kickboxing match in US history) as well as several of his subsequent full contact fights. To say that JKD cannot be used effectively in a ring is to completely dismiss history.

Again, see above.

Fair enough.

Totally agree with that. If a martial arts instructor cannot handle themselves and replicate that ability (to a respectable degree at least) in their students then I don’t care what they say their style is, they should not be advertising it as self defense or RMA.

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Well, that’s not entirely true, if a trainer or boxer trained under a really successful trainer or boxer themselves, then generally that person gains some credibility. Of course, that’s if we’re talking about seeking out a coach (which is not the same thing as asking whether someone can fight).
[/quote]

They gain a tiny bit, but everything is decided in the ring. You can see immediately if the technique is there, and the rest all comes out.

It’s much more cut and dried.

[quote]
That’s not necessarily true though. A great fighter does not necessarily make a great coach. In fact, the three greatest coaches of the 20th century (Ed Futch, Angelo Dundee, and Cus D Amato) were not successful fighters themselves. Conversely, very few previous great fighters go on to become highly successful boxing trainers. The two qualities aren’t mutually exclusive of course, but they are separate qualities nonetheless.

If I had the choice to train with Pacquiao or Roach, I’d pick Roach any day of the week. But you can bet that Pac would whoop him in a fight.[/quote]

You’re nitpicking. Freddie Roach could fight. He’s no ATG but he knows how to box. I’m talking about learning all these “techniques” and “systems” that are based around who taught you and not whether it works.

I wouldn’t learn to box from someone who couldn’t do it themselves, and I wouldn’t learn to streetfight from someone who hadn’t been in the shit.

If you don’t, or you haven’t, then it’s all just theory and I don’t care what you’re saying. I love senseis that have never been punched in the face.

[quote] I love senseis that have never been punched in the face.
[/quote]

But I love punching their students in the face more.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Well, that’s not entirely true, if a trainer or boxer trained under a really successful trainer or boxer themselves, then generally that person gains some credibility. Of course, that’s if we’re talking about seeking out a coach (which is not the same thing as asking whether someone can fight).
[/quote]

They gain a tiny bit, but everything is decided in the ring. You can see immediately if the technique is there, and the rest all comes out.

It’s much more cut and dried.

Yeah, I hear you on that. I’m just saying that just because you can do something doesn’t mean you can teach someone else how to do it. I personally like seeking out people who can do both (best of both worlds IMO).

Sorry to hijack the thread but I don’t know how to pm people.

CSTRATTON2 - you sound experienced in JKD. I live in N Wales and am considering training with one of the JKD schools in Wrexham (there are 3). Have you had anything to do or know anything about any of them? Can you recommend a school in my area?

Thanks