Originally posted by Waxwood rod JKD is by no means the outdated term for MMA. JKD has specific philosophies and methods of attack and defense. JKD strives to cover all ranges of combat, but not by simply learning MT and BJJ, etc. An interesting JKD forum is The Paul Bax Show forums, I don’t think they are allowing new members, but still much to read. Some pretty heavy dudes post there.
yeah, it’s more eclectic, but is all that really necessary? when I was training in jun fan, we did trappling, but I haven’t used any trapping at all since, neither in the street nor in the ring, there really hasn’t been a need, and in thai boxng, it’s rare to even get the opportunity.
Do I really need savate kicks, silat kicks AND thai kicks?
jkd is great, but can something be too eclectic for it’s own good?
JKD Concepts has very little to do with training in many different styles. Its about using training methods from many different styles to become proficient in the different ranges.
Some specific training methods are better at training specific attributes then others. Which is mainly why and how you choose which training method to use/do over another. Eventually when you advance past “the basics” you begin to specialize and your training method selection/use will reflect your changing goals.
Originally posted by yenhoi
[B]JKD Concepts has very little to do with training in many different styles. Its about using training methods from many different styles to become proficient in the different ranges.
:eek: [/B]
sticking with my kick example, are they dividing kicks into long kick, medium kick and short kick range?
We don’t. I’ve seen some that do. Others do them by art.
We all only have two kicking tools. Right/left or rear/lead. However you want to cut up the pie.
There are also many, many ways to use both tools. No one needs to know all the different ways to be basically proficient in standing range. Standing range has many components, not just kicking, and kicking is not separate from any of the other elements of standing range.
So to have the “basics” in Standing range, you need to have the “basics” of punching, kicking, knees, elbows, foot sectoring, etc…
For the “JKD Phase I Level” the training is focused on tool acquisition, conditioning, and gross attribute development. Most of the training areas are categorized by “Tool” not by style/art/method or Range. The Kicking Tools are not then separated by art, they are just types of kicking 1-10, and the training methods used to train/drill those tools might come from jun fan, kali/silat/panantukan/panajakman, savate, muay thai, wing chun, tai chi, whatever the instructor has experiences in.
Being able to throw straight kicks, round kicks, and inside kicks, snapping, crashing, or pushing or whatever isn’t a MT vs Savate thing. Of course both arts have nearly all the same stuff cause they cover the same ground. What’s interesting is that they have different training methods that target specific attributes and skill acquisition. That’s why you would use a thai method and then turn around and use a savate method in the same training session - Attribute and skill acquisition, as opposed to only being worried about technique development.
from my understanding, JKD is just a concept. bruce encouraged people to fight their own way, forge their own path.
All of Bruce’s experiences with MMA led to his philosophies and blending ideals that created JKD, because all of its techniques and philosophies, regardless of style, were oriented towards his own attributes. everyone has to express their kung-fu their own way, regardless of what they train, because of physical and theological differences between each and every person. he called his style JKD, which never established it as a fighting style that you can teach, it was just his own personal expression of all his attributes and kung fu.
to call your style JKD is like saying that you are Bruce not trying to bash at all, JKD isn’t something bad to study, it’s just that it’s hard to learn someone’s personal expression of kung fu, personal expression is intuitive. it’s that whole idea that you don’t fight like your sifu, he teaches you a curriculum, and you employ your own tools to grasp the ideas, and fight with it.
So, why is there a Jeet Kune Do Federation? Daoism teaches us that once the nameless is named then it is no longer nameless or eternal. So Jeet Kune Do can’t be a “style without a style” because the minute Bruce called it Jeet Kune Do it became something outside of the eternal Tao. In other words IT BECAME A STYLE!! Wing Chun was it’s mothers milk with all of the other stuff glued on to it.
Bruce calling it “Jeet Kune Do,” is the same as if I just came up with my own style and called it “The Funky Foot Style.” It’s got a name, a symbol, and it’s funky. That makes it a style period.
If Bruce didn’t want you to fight like he did and come up with your own completely different expression, my question is this: If you didn’t use any Wing Chun techniques at all and you were a follower of Bruce’s philosofies and “style”, could you still call your own expression of kung fu Jeet kune Do? What if you thought Wing Chun was a girl’s style or you thought it was just too ineffective and you wanted no part of it, but you still thought Bruce was cool? I cross train in Ba Gua, Tai Chi, and Northern Shaolin and I certainly wouldn’t call my style or expression Jeet Kune Do. But then again, why wouldn’t I? I use what works for me. It’s my own expression.
I think Bruce proclaiming that JKD wasn’t a style was sort of like him saying “you can never really fight like me.” But then again, he must have known that generations of JKD followers were going to try and emulate him and move as much like he did as possible. Even if they add other stuff that he didn’t use or explore. Basically what I’m trying to say is that all of this grey area about whether or not JKD is a “style” seems contradictory and kind of ridiculous.
Originally posted by SevenStar
[B]yeah, it’s more eclectic, but is all that really necessary? when I was training in jun fan, we did trappling, but I haven’t used any trapping at all since, neither in the street nor in the ring, there really hasn’t been a need, and in thai boxng, it’s rare to even get the opportunity.
Do I really need savate kicks, silat kicks AND thai kicks?
jkd is great, but can something be too eclectic for it’s own good? [/B]
Gee. When I was in my formal JKD training we never did “savate kicks” or “silat kicks” or “thai kicks”. (Well, I can speak confidently about not doing thai kicks since I’ve done enough Thai recently to know that the way I kick is “wrong” MT wise. For one thing MT kicks “spin through” if they miss). Of course that gets into the whole “what is JKD” and “OJKD vs JKDC” stuff. Still while I won’t say you AREN’T a JKD practioner if you prefer MT, Silat or Savate kicks, there’s nothing written in stone that says you HAVE to kick that way. I use front, straight, hook, side and oblique kicks. I experiment on ways to make my kicks stronger, faster and less telegraphic. I may take some time to learn how somebody ELSE does a kick (how better to know what to expect from such a fighter?) but I don’t try to pratice 3 or 4 different kicking styles. But that’s just me. [:D]
Originally posted by jmdrake Gee. When I was in my formal JKD training we never did “savate kicks” or “silat kicks” or “thai kicks”.
We did. They didn’t categorize them - like putting in a syllabus that we must learn x number of kicks from x different styles, but if it was a teep, for example, they would tell us that it was a muay thai kick.
(Well, I can speak confidently about not doing thai kicks since I’ve done enough Thai recently to know that the way I kick is “wrong” MT wise. For one thing MT kicks “spin through” if they miss).
yes and no. Typically, when you miss with the kick, the force will continue your spin. But, I’ve recently been exposed to people who don’t do it that way. I was at a seminar with a muay thai champ named manu ntoh. He is a big proponent of being able to stop the kick as opposed to continuing the spin. He showed us some video of fighters in thailand doing it as well. The reason makes sense - when you spin around, it’s pretty much a given that you will have a kick coming to either your legs, kidney or head. Some people will continue the spin and bring up a leg check as they are completing the turn. Others will simply duck and turn. Manu prefers that you not turn at all. I can’t stop a hard kick in mid kick like that, however. Not yet, anyway.
Of course that gets into the whole “what is JKD” and “OJKD vs JKDC” stuff. Still while I won’t say you AREN’T a JKD practioner if you prefer MT, Silat or Savate kicks, there’s nothing written in stone that says you HAVE to kick that way. I use front, straight, hook, side and oblique kicks.
Originally posted by Siu Lum Fighter So, why is there a Jeet Kune Do Federation? Daoism teaches us that once the nameless is named then it is no longer nameless or eternal. So Jeet Kune Do can’t be a “style without a style” because the minute Bruce called it Jeet Kune Do it became something outside of the eternal Tao. In other words IT BECAME A STYLE!! Wing Chun was it’s mothers milk with all of the other stuff glued on to it.
it’s not a style - it’s a framework, a concept. It can’t become something it’s not. What he did was give name to his concept. His concept was based on wing chun.
The tao has a name…how can it be eternal?
If Bruce didn’t want you to fight like he did and come up with your own completely different expression, my question is this: If you didn’t use any Wing Chun techniques at all and you were a follower of Bruce’s philosofies and “style”, could you still call your own expression of kung fu Jeet kune Do?
I would say yes. As I stated earlier, I hate trapping with a passion. If I were to return to jkd and get certified, I would not teach the WC aspects. I would be teaching my interpretation of the framework - what I feel is useful. mat thornton’s camp utilizes boxing, wrestling, bjj and muay thai. their “trapping” is mainly muay thai and greco clinch work.
I cross train in Ba Gua, Tai Chi, and Northern Shaolin and I certainly wouldn’t call my style or expression Jeet Kune Do. But then again, why wouldn’t I? I use what works for me. It’s my own expression.
just as taiji utilizes principles - yielding, borrowing, ward off, etc. JKD does as well. attack by combinataion, attack by drawing, etc. These concepts are what you are studying. The method you use to employ them is your choice, I would imagine.
So is that to say that JKD only exists today because Inosanto and the others who trained under Bruce wanted to pay homage to him (and maybe make bucket loads of money in the process) and not because Bruce wanted JKD’s legacy to live on?
So is that to say that JKD only exists today because Inosanto and the others who trained under Bruce wanted to pay homage to him (and maybe make bucket loads of money in the process) and not because Bruce wanted JKD’s legacy to live on? [/B]
Simple answer ‘yes’!
Before he died Bruce said he thought what they were doing had too much probability of becoming stylised.
Though I have to say Inosanato’s love of MA is clearly evident, for him and least, and I dare say most of the other instructors, if it wasn’t JKD it would have been something else anyway.
On a personal level I think Bruce would not have approved, I think he would have felt trapped and stagnant doing the same things.
From a MAists point of view I think he would have understood and probably allowed it.
