Bruce Lee's Vision

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

Here’s the first post from a thread on a different martial art forum:

The thread is entitled: We are living Bruce Lee’s vision.

From: Ogami Itto
Posted: 2 hours ago Member Since: 11/12/02
Posts: 37367 Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up

Okay, seriously, I know we’re sick to death of “Bruce Lee and his legacy in MMA” but I recently spent some time with his writings and biographies and I have to conclude that, in fact, Bruce was an important fore-runner to MMA.

In particular I’m referenced John Little’s Jeet Kune Do commentary, which fills out the Tao of JKD notebook a bit more, and in it Lee evaluates various styles and what each can contribute to the fighter - and he sounds prescient, saying in 1970 what a lot of people are saying today about kicks, boxing hand work, clinching, throwing and ground fighting. I think Lee would have been surprised by the innovations judo/BJJ brought to fighting but he certainly anticipated them.

Add to that his feelings about STYLE, that his style was no style, and compare that to the “styles” of MMA fighters - all of whom could be said to not have a specific style at all and I gotta conclude, wow, we are living Bruce Lee’s vision. He was more interested in street fighting or pure physical training and philosophy rather than cage fighting or sport, but he called it - his personal evolution is where martial arts has gone in the last fifteen years.

…

***COMMENTS,…wing chun people?

2

I don’t have issues with what BL said, in general.
However, you will notice that the best MMA fighters are those with a solid core in ONE specific MA or “range” of MA.
Such as Silva with his MT and BB in BBJ.
GSP with his kyokushin and MT and as of late, wrestling.
Mirko in his time with MT.
Machida with Shotokan.
Heck any BJJ player.
Etc, etc.

The core built from being very good in one “range” of MA, like striking for example, and then adding to your game to fill in the gaps, will always be the way to go.
Even when MMA becomes the norm from the start, people will tend to gravitate to one “range” more than another, and this is a good thing.

3

That’a great point, Paul.

You need to have a “core” art that you’ve spent some considerable amount of time learning and getting skilled in, otherwise you run the risk of living out the “jack of all trades, master of none” cliche.

And the argument could be made that for Bruce, the core art was wing chun. Certainly in the earlier years of his JKD journey. In fact, I have a book home somewhere that was written by Dan Inosanto (I believe it may have been the very first book ever to appear in print with the words “Jeet Kune Do” in the title)…

in fact, as I’m writing this I’m remembering now the exact title: “JEET KUNE DO, the Art and Philosophy of Bruce Lee”.

Anyway, Dan makes the point very early in the book that wing chun was the “nucleus” of what Bruce was trying to do with JKD; ie.- use of a centerline, simultaneous attack-and-defense using both arms, short, quick, and very direct strikes, low kicks, trapping, etc.

4

Yeah, there is no doubt that BL’s core was Wing Chun, in fact one can call the striking done in JKD as “westernized WC”.
Certainly the principles were all there, at least the ones that apply to fighting.
I tend to favour a “core range” rather than core style, simply because most striking systems tend to be the same or at least have enough in common that the similarities outweight the differences.
Anyone only has to see MT and kyokushin, for example, to see that.
Of course the “power production” in WC is quite different than in Hung ga for example, yet very few will argue that a HG guy going to WC will bring power that, when applied to WC, will add a certain “BAM” to his strikes.

I do think that BL probably would have fallen, eventually, into the category of the fighter that has a striking core system(s) and that trains/fights others so as to know how to beat them ( and pick something up he can use) as opposed to the category of “Mixed MA”.

5

I agree with the ‘core’ skill assessment and rounding out from there. As an interesting side note, I asked a MT guy who was once ranked #2 in the world about the skill levels of some of the UFC champions and their strict MT levels compared to what he had experienced. He said none of them was world champion class, but that a couple were 85-90% there, and had no weaknesses - 85% of the best on ground, 85% in wrestling.

Reading BL’s material from what I remember he incorporated a great deal of fencing and boxing in his approach. Definitely ahead of his time on blending strengths of different arts. For some reason the ground skills weren’t exposed in the same communities as striking skills during his time. I’ve also heard him criticized in the WC community as having only finished the SNT level of his WCK training.

6

I remember watching ETD (again) around the same time I was heavily into Matt Thornton’s (of “Functional JKD” fame) vids in my early BJJ days.

There are a lot of similarities. BL wins the first fight in ETD on the ground with a submission. He sneers at the flunky who chides him for not wearing the right uniform at Han’s tournament. Et cetera.

Matt Thornton is probably the highest profile JKD guy around at the moment, and while he’s gone far beyond Bruce Lee worship, I think Bruce might have ended up in a smilar place had he lived.

Actually, he’s not the only movie star to go this way - Richard Norton is an excellent martial artist with major achievements in several MA’s, as is Chuck Norris - seriously.

7

I’ve also heard him criticized in the WC community as having only finished the SNT level of his WCK training.

Some people say SNT… some people say chum kiu… Hawkins Cheung was supposedly a good friend of his, and he says bruce learned SNT, Chum Kiu and the first forty movements on the dummy. Not bad because that’s the majority of the curriculum.

That being said, his knowledge in WC could easily have been completed with his training in southern mantis and other similar styles.

8

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;923851]Here’s the first post from a thread on a different martial art forum:

The thread is entitled: We are living Bruce Lee’s vision.

From: Ogami Itto
Posted: 2 hours ago Member Since: 11/12/02
Posts: 37367 Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up

Okay, seriously, I know we’re sick to death of “Bruce Lee and his legacy in MMA” but I recently spent some time with his writings and biographies and I have to conclude that, in fact, Bruce was an important fore-runner to MMA.

In particular I’m referenced John Little’s Jeet Kune Do commentary, which fills out the Tao of JKD notebook a bit more, and in it Lee evaluates various styles and what each can contribute to the fighter - and he sounds prescient, saying in 1970 what a lot of people are saying today about kicks, boxing hand work, clinching, throwing and ground fighting. I think Lee would have been surprised by the innovations judo/BJJ brought to fighting but he certainly anticipated them.

Add to that his feelings about STYLE, that his style was no style, and compare that to the “styles” of MMA fighters - all of whom could be said to not have a specific style at all and I gotta conclude, wow, we are living Bruce Lee’s vision. He was more interested in street fighting or pure physical training and philosophy rather than cage fighting or sport, but he called it - his personal evolution is where martial arts has gone in the last fifteen years.

…

***COMMENTS,…wing chun people?[/QUOTE]

In my humble opinion, Bruce Lee’s genuis was not in his kung fu because I don’t believe that he studied any kung fu style to a level of expertise. His expertise was in martial innovation and in dedicated training to turn that innovation into a functional concept.

As we know, he didn’t complete Wing Chun, nor Mantis or any other kung fu style. He did not delve into internal training including aspects such as internal tendon development. His conditioning was external.

I believe that an interesting question would be, how would Bruce Lee’s fighting approach have evolved had he stayed in Hong Kong and continued and completed his Wing Chun under Yip Man rather than one his students?

What if he had gone on to take up or “cross train” in another kung fu style that was more profound than Wing Chun both in concepts and in the internals? How would his martial arts philosophy have developed then?

I do agree that his MMA perspective was ahead of his time. As someone here mentioned before one can see references to groundfighting in Enter the Dragon. One can also see this in The Game of Death in the fashionBruce Lee finishes off Kareem Abdul Jabar. I suppose if one stretches his imagination then one will even see him address the ground scenario when he bites the Russian fighter’s leg when he is taken down and arm locked in the pen-ultimate fight scene.

To conclude. IMHO many of those practising modern MMA may fall under the definition of Bruce Lee’s vision of “functionality” but this, for the most part, does not make them kung fu fighters.

9

Bruce Lee’s genuis was not in his kung fu because I don’t believe that he studied any kung fu style to a level of expertise.

Which is a hilarious statement when you consider that everyone who knew him and trained with him, felt otherwise.

But the random kung fu sifu who didn’t even know someone who knew him, and only watched videos, knows exactly what his skill level was, huh? :rolleyes:

As we know, he didn’t complete Wing Chun, nor Mantis or any other kung fu style.

Completing a system doesn’t necessarily mean you are an expert, or that you are not an expert.

Systems are a set of concepts and physical templates. I can take part of the wing chun curriculum, and part of the mantis curriculum, and be more knowledgable than most kung fu sifu’s who only know one, or the other.

It doesn’t hurt that wing chun and south mantis have plenty in common, either.

He did not delve into internal training including aspects such as internal tendon development. His conditioning was external.

Show me a fighter who has. Not some asshat in the mid-west who doesn’t even fight.

No, he used realistic, scientifically proven conditioning methods that made sense.

I believe that an interesting question would be, how would Bruce Lee’s fighting approach have evolved had he stayed in Hong Kong and continued and completed his Wing Chun under Yip Man rather than one his students?

Who knows. Based on the type of person he was, it would be about the same. Except he’d know how to do biu gee omfgwtf.

What if he had gone on to take up or “cross train” in another kung fu style that was more profound than Wing Chun both in concepts and in the internals? How would his martial arts philosophy have developed then?

He did train with Lam Sang, in South Mantis. He never finished it, but lam sang was a hell of a teacher and bruce lee was a hell of a student.

To conclude. IMHO many of those practising modern MMA may fall under the definition of Bruce Lee’s vision of “functionality” but this, for the most part, does not make them kung fu fighters.

Kung fu isn’t a living entity dude. Its a static idea. No matter what you add or change, it is a set of ideas and physical templates. It does not develop on its own - Human beings develop it.

The human body is a living entity that develops. We are not kung fu fighters but fighters who utilize methods in kung fu.

10

[QUOTE=AdrianK;924036]Which is a hilarious statement when you consider that everyone who knew him and trained with him, felt otherwise.[/quote]
I believe that everyone felt that he was an excellent martial artist, even a genious but that still doesn’t make him a kung fu expert in the authentic sense.

Thank you but I am not a sifu, far from it. However, there seem to be plenty of “kung fu” :rolleyes: “sifus”:rolleyes: here in the forums for you to direct your deragotary posts. Some of these “sifus”:rolleyes: even follow the Bruce Lee line of martial arts functionality but perhaps without his genious.:wink:

Also no one is doubting Bruce Lee’s fighting or MA skill level. I am “doubting” the use of the word kung fu in regards to what he did!

I don’t believe that you made the above statement!

Ok, here goes, if you study in a REAL kung fu school then you will be an expert by the time you finish the system. No decent master or sifu is going to let you just go through the motions and “complete” the system.:rolleyes:

Or you can be a Jack of All Trades!

That is if you don’t first gain expert knowledge in one of those arts before going on to study the next one. Of course, if you had expert knowldedge in both then that might just be an advantage.:wink:

However, that would take years of dedicated practice under a real sifu(s), not necessarily a “famous” one(s)!

Not as much as you think, apparently.

How come Bruce Lee never talked about internal training including those that are directly related to internal tendon development (SPM) and the resultant body unity?

I bought some books of his when I was young. Where are the Gow Chois (hammer fists) and Phoenix eye techniques? Or were they there but I missed it? Well I haven’t had a look at those books for a long time and I will stand corrected.

I have met three sifus who have the internals who can fight. Just because you have not been made aware of the significance of the internals to combat in TCMAs then don’t assume that they are not a fundamental part of kung fu training.

Using that logic then you would assume that he could beat every traditional kung fu stylist on the face of this planet and we both know (I hope:eek:) that this is not true.

So you think that the difference between the Chum Kiu level in Wing Chun and the Biu Gee is just the Biu Gee form? I believe that you have misunderstood not just Wing Chun but the whole of TCMAs.

And you are a hell of a way out of your depth!

I have news for you “dude”. For “human beings” to develop kung fu they should first gain expert knowledge or mastery in it so as to understand it holistically, including all ranges; the higher levels of the internals and other aspects such as perhaps advanced Iron Palm/fist/body.

Once high levels of kung fu expertise and understandings are achieved, then one can go on to develop a given style and that is what past masters did. It was not a case of “I won’t bother to train for many years to understand this stuff so I will fill in the gaps by inventing my stuff or crosstraining in the local Bjj gym”!

You can only do the above if you train dedicatedly for many years in authentic school and with an authentic sifu who is willing to teach you the advanced stuff. We all know how Yip Man felt about Bruce Lee.:wink:

I am sorry, but if you want to be a kung fu fighter then you have to USE kung fu when you fight and not just a few aspects that you think suit you!

If you are just borrowing and mish mashing techniques from kung fu and mixing them with other MAs then what you do is not kung fu. Because if you use a “kung fu” punch and then follow it up with a Muay Thai kick while hoping around a la Bruce Lee (or a boxer/kickboxer), then what you are doing is your own MMA. You can even call it “Jeet Kune Do”.:rolleyes:

However it has nothing to do with authentic kung fu. You may want to call this kung fu because of the fact you used a “kung fu” punch but then why not call what you do Muay Thai? Or kickboxing? Or Karate, if you happen to use some karate techniques, as well?

11

I believe that everyone felt that he was an excellent martial artist, even a genious but that still doesn’t make him a kung fu expert in the authentic sense.

lol, so please share with me what this authentic sense is.

I don’t believe that you made the above statement!

Ok, here goes, if you study in a REAL kung fu school then you will be an expert by the time you finish the system. No decent master or sifu is going to let you just go through the motions and “complete” the system.

Finishing the system does not make you an expert. Memorization and rehearsal of movements does not mean you understand the system, or its application.

In Wing Chun, you can learn biu gee, chum kiu, siu lim tao, the entire wooden dummy, the 8 and a half foot pole, the butterfly swords and how to do all of the movements exactly like your Sifu does them.

But that DOESNT mean you understand the application of the system. All of the concepts it teaches, or can explain any of it in your own words.

There are PLENTY of people who show this clear LACK of expertise, on various wing chun forums, who have “Completed” the system.

Or you can be a Jack of All Trades!

That is if you don’t first gain expert knowledge in one of those arts before going on to study the next one. Of course, if you had expert knowldedge in both then that might just be an advantage.

It might be. Its debatable exactly what advantage that would give you, it depends on the curriculum and how much they share in common. If I start in one system but don’t finish, but learn most of the concepts, and finish up the concepts I don’t know or understand, in another system, even though I don’t finish the entirety of that system, then I would be about where I would be if I just stayed with the original system to begin with.

It gets ridiculously complicated if we start talking what if’s in that regard.

The fact of the matter is, wing chun concepts and physical templates are not exclusive to wing chun. You can complete your wing chun by studying other systems, if you have a good foundation in wing chun to begin with (which bruce did).

Not as much as you think, apparently.

Having studied both systems, I’d say South Mantis is a more complete system.
But thats just my opinion.

How come Bruce Lee never talked about internal training including those that are directly related to internal tendon development (SPM) and the resultant body unity?

Bruce kept plenty to himself. He didn’t even want to teach double pak sao.

I bought some books of his when I was young. Where are the Gow Chois (hammer fists) and Phoenix eye techniques? Or were they there but I missed it? Well I haven’t had a look at those books for a long time and I will stand corrected.

Are you questioning whether he learned enough from Lam Sang?
Go contact one of Lam Sang’s students who were with him during that time. They’ll set you straight in terms of bruce lee’s knowledge of phoenix eye techniques.

I have met three sifus who have the internals who can fight. Just because you have not been made aware of the significance of the internals to combat in TCMAs then don’t assume that they are not a fundamental part of kung fu training.

Well then go tell those Sifu’s to collect James Randi’s million dollar prize.
Until then, they’re just as full of **** as anyone else.

Using that logic then you would assume that he could beat every traditional kung fu stylist on the face of this planet and we both know (I hope) that this is not true.

Pound for pound his strength would have given him a significant advantage. Theres nothing I’ve ever seen demonstrated by any Traditional Kung Fu stylist that has been anything incredibly better than what bruce lee has taught. Some things are more advanced, sure. But nothing that would decide a fight.

So you think that the difference between the Chum Kiu level in Wing Chun and the Biu Gee is just the Biu Gee form? I believe that you have misunderstood not just Wing Chun but the whole of TCMAs.

Too much importance is placed on the forms. Biu Gee, just like Chum Kiu, just like Sim Lim Tao and the wooden dummy - Everything that is in these forms, is taught to everyone. Forms are simply reference guides.

I have news for you “dude”. For “human beings” to develop kung fu they should first gain expert knowledge or mastery in it so as to understand it holistically, including all ranges; the higher levels of the internals and other aspects such as perhaps advanced Iron Palm/fist/body.

Expert knowledge in something is subjective. Is someone who knows everything but understands very little an “expert”, or is someone who knows some and understands everything hes learned, the real expert?

In reality once you understand the concepts and physical templates, you don’t need style anymore. You are your own expert and master of your body.

Yes, it takes expertise in style, to shed style, but to say bruce didn’t achieve that is ridiculous. His understanding of things was clearly far deeper than most other instructors even today.

Once high levels of kung fu expertise and understandings are achieved, then one can go on to develop a given style and that is what past masters did.

Oh god. So master a style to create a style. Wow thats ****ing deep. :expressionless:

It was not a case of “I won’t bother to train for many years to understand this stuff so I will fill in the gaps by inventing my stuff or crosstraining in the local Bjj gym”!

1.) You won’t find anything in kung fu, that fills in the gaps BJJ does, on the ground.

Bruce trained for many years. He sought knowledge in all places. He was a student of many teachers, and those teachers gave him a more complete grasp of martial arts than most people have, even today.

You can only do the above if you train dedicatedly for many years in authentic school and with an authentic sifu who is willing to teach you the advanced stuff. We all know how Yip Man felt about Bruce Lee.

Really? How did Yip Man feel about bruce lee?

And what is this “Advanced stuff”? Why is it “Advanced” anyway? Because its more complicated from a kung fu perspective? Cause scientifically speaking, your advanced stuff is pretty ****ing simple.

12

While it is true that Bruce Lee did not finish his wing chun training, I think it should be pretty obvious from watching his movies, reading his magazine articles, and reading his books (and Inosanto’s books) that Bruce clearly did have a working knowledge and skill level of all the core concepts of Yip Man’s publicly taught C-O-M version of the art (ie.- attacking the opponent’s center of mass while always protecting one’s own centerline).

So this is really a false issue: "What could he have done if he actually did complete his wing chun training?! :rolleyes: :smiley:

And typical of the kool aid mentality that so often permeates this forum. :rolleyes:

Furthermore, if one studies the arc of Bruce’s JKD journey, I think it should also be obvious that, had he lived longer, he would have explored - and probably excelled at- grappling arts, ie.- we do know that he spent some time with Gene Lebell learning some catch werstling and judo, and also with Wally Jay learning some judo…

and indeed, some of these moves do show up in at least two of his movies, ENTER THE DRAGON and also THE GAME OF DEATH.

And furthermore, as another point of speculation, were he alive today and a participant in the current mma movement, I’d anticipate that Bruce would have been a Kazushi Sakuraba type who could also punch and block like a demon…

the only real hole in Sakuraba’a game, as he was just an “okay” puncher/blocker - as can be seen in accounting, imo, for his devastating losses to an excellent striker, Vanderlai Silva.

13

PART 1

[QUOTE=AdrianK;924061]lol, so please share with me what this authentic sense is.[/quote]
Authentic sense of kung fu training would encompass the roots as well as the internals, among other things. Bruce did not have the internals. I don’t recall him talking about them in his four training books. His roots resembled that of a boxer/fencer rather than that of a kung fu/Wing Chun stylist.

His criticism of the “fist by the hip” position seen in many kung fu (and karate) ignored the fact that a lot of the time those positions are for training and not for fighting. When used for fighting there is a valid application for the fist on the side and it does not leave you “open to attack.”

Bruce Lee was against forms training. Forms training work on many levels INCLUDING sometimes on the INTERNAL one. Ignorance of the internals will only make your MA only external, that is, no Yin and Yang balance.

So please don’t say that Bruce Lee was an authentic kung fu expert as I don’t believe that even he would have claimed that!

When I refer to “finishing a system” I am talking about with a genuine kung fu sifu in a genuine kung fu school. If you have ever studied in an authentic combat oriented kung fu school then you will know what I am talking about.

Kung fu schools that only teach forms and make you memorise the techniques so that you can complete a system are Mcdojos/Mckwoons!

That is Wing Chun on one level. There are many levels in wing chun and to learn those you would need to go to a proper school!

You will if you are studying in an authentic kung fu school that teachs Wing Chun holistically and on its many levels!

Tell me about it.:rolleyes:

I am not saying that you can’t start with one system and then go on to study another one with a few carry on advantages. After all many kung fu styles have many things in common. However, you cannot complete your Wing Chun by studying Praying Mantis, as you can’t complete your Praying Mantis by studying Wing Chun. That does not mean that you don’t get stronger and better at kung fu but at the end of the day to be an expert in a give style you need to complete it fully (deep understanding of applications,internals, etc.).

They are exclusive enough to make Wing Chun look different to Southern Praying Mantis (as well as other Southern styles with whom it shares similarities, eg. White Crane).

Also, you don’t get the WC stance shifting in SPM, at least not the lineage I am familiar with.

Correction, you can improve your kung fu or even your Wing Chun by studying other valid kung fu systems under genuine sifus, but you can only complete your Wing Chun by completing the Wing Chun syllabus which will enable you to have a deeper understanding of its techniques, various principles, concepts (including the internals) and their higher level applications inside this style’s distinct framework. You are not going to get that from studying another style of kung fu which happens to share some of WC’s principles.

You may be right but again IMHO you can’t complete WC by completing Praying Mantis. Again you may improve your personal kung fu or become a better fighter but you cannot claim expertise in Wing Chun.

In Bruce’s case he went on to create something that violated some of the WC principles and as far as I know, in later life he did not refer to JKD as kung fu, even if his publicity claimed him to be the “King of Kung Fu”.

14

PART 2

I was under the impression of him being very open about what he did, "no secret techniques"and all that. He taught openly. After all he was one of the first to teach Westerners. Maybe we can contribute the Mcdojo phenomenom to him as well.:eek::smiley:

Furthermore a lot his training methodology contradicts the internal SPM (and WC ones that I have been taught).

I don’t need to talk to them. Bruce Lee always spoke his mind and did share his knowledge. I believe that he took whatever he had learnt in kung fu that worked for him, mixed with a whole lot of other stuff and went on to create his own thing.

My point is that he did not complete Wing Chun nor any other kung fu system. Furthermore, what he created does not fit withing a kung fu framework.

You seem to have misunderstood the kung fu internals just like most of the others here in the forum, including some kung fu “sifus” apparently. That is very suprising because Siu Nim Tao itself is in part an internal (chi kung) exercise and as far as my lineage of WC is concerned we are taught supplimentary internal exercises as well. You say that you have studied SPM. A lot of this style is also internal based!

IMHO, your lack of understanding regarding the internals has invalidated the above statements. Furthermore, you probably have not seen too many traditional combat oriented kung fu masters or sifus.

There can be levels to the study of forms. I would even say that to be true more in the case of SPM than WC. Also during the teachings of a given form at a given level other relevant stuff is covered. So it is not the case of “hey memorise this form and then you can go to the next level”, that is pure Mcdojo. Real kung fu schools don’t work that way.

It is subjective if the person judging this expertise is not an expert himself.:wink:

Of course not!
An expert is someone who knows everything and understands those things at a very high level. That is what I am talking about. If your kung fu school is only teaching you movements for you to memorise then please go and ask for your money back.

He may be a genius and should go and see James Randi. Talking of genius, lets go back to Bruce Lee. He probably was a genuis and he made what he did work for him as far as combat MA is concerned but he was no kung fu master, in the authentic/traditional sense.

And you can get to that level through expertise in kung fu, karate, kickboxing and so on. Bruce Lee used a MIX. His base was wing chun (which he never completed) and what he ended up with resembled some kind of a kickboxing/MMA mix with a bit of stand up WC stuff thrown in and “adapted”.

I will go on to say that he eventually gained expertise in the WC stuff that he actually learnt in Hong Kong, but he did not learn the whole system and hence could not have gained expertise in things that he had not learnt.

Unfortunately, that is not saying much.:wink:

Well that is what I have been trying to tell you man!

How would one know if one has not fully completed a single style of kung fu in an AUTHENTIC school???

I believe that you are mixing Bruce Lee`s MMA and combat fighting prowess with his lack of traditional kung fu expertise.

According to my readings Yip Man wouldn’t even teach him personally as Bruce was of mixed blood.

To make such a statement would imply that you are familiar with the advanced stuff and science required to test it. Unfortunately base on what you have written in this thread I would say that you are not qualified to discuss the validity of the internals and the advanced techniques based on their mastery. Of course, I am not an expert, nor a sifu and I have never claimed to be, however my training approach has been authentic as I have been lucky enough to train with authentic kung fu sifus, hence I know enough to see the difference.

15

[QUOTE=Ultimatewingchun;924071]While it is true that Bruce Lee did not finish his wing chun training, I think it should be pretty obvious from watching his movies, reading his magazine articles, and reading his books (and Inosanto’s books) that Bruce clearly did have a working knowledge and skill level of all the core concepts of Yip Man’s publicly taught C-O-M version of the art (ie.- attacking the opponent’s center of mass while always protecting one’s own centerline).[/quote]

Anyone training in an authentic Wing Chun school should have that “working knowledge” at Chum Kiu level.

He would probably have gainned a better understanding of the internal side of kung fu and that would have made his TCMA knowledge richer. As it turned out he went and crosstrained in may MAs and gained expertise in fighting and MMA, but his Wing Chun was incomplete.

What really permeates in this forum is an “external” knucklehead mentality that ignores the internals of kung fu and practices kung fu as an incomplete art. This may be good discussion point in another thread.

I have no doubt about that. Bruce was living his own journey but his path was a warrior’s path but not a kung fu one.

As mentioned before.:wink:

I believe that we should see Bruce Lee for what he was. An excellent martial artist; perhaps even a genious; an innovator and finally a hero for the eventual MMA movement and not necessarily for kung fu.

Yes he did develop expertise in whatever Wing Chun that he had learnt but he had not learnt the complete style. He talked about the “classical mess” and so on. I believe that had he reached an expert level of understanding in the “classical” styles then he would have been less critical.

16

Authentic sense of kung fu training would encompass the roots as well as the internals, among other things. Bruce did not have the internals. I don’t recall him talking about them in his four training books. His roots resembled that of a boxer/fencer rather than that of a kung fu/Wing Chun stylist.

Thats under the assumption that the internals are scientifically verifiable. Which given the amount of kung fu people who fight, they would be king of the ****ing hill if they actually made any kind of real difference.

But they’re not.
And not because they “Don’t want to prove anything”, its because they’re ****ing scared of getting their asses beat.

His criticism of the “fist by the hip” position seen in many kung fu (and karate) ignored the fact that a lot of the time those positions are for training and not for fighting. When used for fighting there is a valid application for the fist on the side and it does not leave you “open to attack.”

The 60’s and 70’s were a very different time for martial arts. Non-martial artists would see this and believe this was what a martial arts punch was.

Bruce Lee was against forms training. Forms training work on many levels INCLUDING sometimes on the INTERNAL one. Ignorance of the internals will only make your MA only external, that is, no Yin and Yang balance.

There is no scientific evidence that forms are any better than strength training, exercise, and proper breathing.

The form is just an expression of proper training methods. You dissect them and what do you get? Individual training methods that most people in the fitness world already do, in better ways.

Besides that, they’re references.

They don’t build chi power to throw a god**** fireball, or repel bullets with your abs of steel.

They’re honestly worthless beyond a point of reference. And I would love to see any kind of scientific evidence that says otherwise. Taiji forms are used for health because its a fun, attractive way to strengthan your body. You don’t NEED to adhere to the specific movements, you simply NEED to put your body in positions that challenge your muscles, tendons, etc. Then the concept of relaxation and proper breathing translates into that as well.

But I don’t NEED Siu Lim Tao to learn how to breathe properly. I don’t need it to know how to do a tan sao properly. I don’t need it to know how to do a wu sao properly. All of this is taught by competent instructors, individually.

When I refer to “finishing a system” I am talking about with a genuine kung fu sifu in a genuine kung fu school. If you have ever studied in an authentic combat oriented kung fu school then you will know what I am talking about.

What is a genuine kung fu sifu in a genuine kung fu school? You’re speaking in vague terms again. If you mean a combat oriented kung fu school, well bruce’s was pretty combat oriented. But I thought you wanted internals? Whats that got to do with combat? Abso****inglutely nothing. If there was something extraordinary about it, as said before, it would have been shown.

But instead, these *******s hide in their schools claiming of incredible feats without ever feeling the need to challenge themselves and show how full of **** they really are.

Kung fu schools that only teach forms and make you memorise the techniques so that you can complete a system are Mcdojos/Mckwoons!

The Kung Fu world in general is mcdojos and mckwoons. honestly. Just take a look at the bull**** printed in inside kung fu on a regular basis.

That is Wing Chun on one level. There are many levels in wing chun and to learn those you would need to go to a proper school!

I’ve been to some of the best wing chun instructors out here.

There are always “dumb” students in every school, who get promoted regardless because they put in time and effort, and are generally good people and thus there isn’t any real problem with that. Or, they’ve managed to mimic their sifu without ever having a real understanding of it.

These things are extremely hard to gauge. Its easy for someone to say, oh yeah, I agree with you on that sifu, and instinctively mimic their instructor, their explanations, etc, and its extremely hard when someone does this, to differentiate between real knowledge, and memorization. Even universities have wide-spread problems with this, and its result of incompetent graduates.

You will if you are studying in an authentic kung fu school that teachs Wing Chun holistically and on its many levels!

Ya know, show me this amazing kung fu school of yours. Got videos? Got written word of these instructors, even?

However, you cannot complete your Wing Chun by studying Praying Mantis, as you can’t complete your Praying Mantis by studying Wing Chun.

That really depends on what you learn, at what points. There is nothing in biu gee or the movements 41 - 108, that south mantis doesn’t have. Honestly. It might be one or two little things, but in terms of concepts and methods, its just ridiculous to say that there is a large difference between these systems.

They are exclusive enough to make Wing Chun look different to Southern Praying Mantis (as well as other Southern styles with whom it shares similarities, eg. White Crane).

Everything looks different on the outside. If you studied these systems you’d know just how much they have in common.
Just because their tan is a little bit different in white crane and south mantis, doesn’t make a bit of ****ing difference.

Actually conceptually, its far less spoonfed then wing chun is. Many south mantis techniques have multiple applications that wing chun instead, splits into multiple, defined techniques. But in terms of applicability, there really is very little difference.

17

Also, you don’t get the WC stance shifting in SPM, at least not the lineage I am familiar with.

And which lineage would that be?

but you can only complete your Wing Chun by completing the Wing Chun syllabus which will enable you to have a deeper understanding of its techniques, various principles, concepts (including the internals) and their higher level applications inside this style’s distinct framework.

The funny thing when you talk about internals in wing chun is, when did yip man die again? How old was he?
How 'bout wong shun leung?

Exactly, but I can name more than a few taiji/xingyi/bagua practitioners that have lived to their 90’s and 100’s.

As for your other point - Technically it will not be wing chun. In terms of applicability - It will have pretty much everything that wing chun has.

In Bruce’s case he went on to create something that violated some of the WC principles and as far as I know, in later life he did not refer to JKD as kung fu, even if his publicity claimed him to be the “King of Kung Fu”.

Thats probably because he understood the need to shed style.

I was under the impression of him being very open about what he did, "no secret techniques"and all that. He taught openly. After all he was one of the first to teach Westerners. Maybe we can contribute the Mcdojo phenomenom to him as well.

Go and read what his students who are teaching, have to say about that.
More than a few have said they were told to not teach certain things.

I don’t need to talk to them. Bruce Lee always spoke his mind and did share his knowledge. I believe that he took whatever he had learnt in kung fu that worked for him, mixed with a whole lot of other stuff and went on to create his own thing.

My point is that he did not complete Wing Chun nor any other kung fu system. Furthermore, what he created does not fit withing a kung fu framework.

Blah blah blah blah blah. :smiley:
Your Kung Fu Framework is so extremely well defined, i’m surprised anything fits within it.

You seem to have misunderstood the kung fu internals just like most of the others here in the forum, including some kung fu “sifus” apparently. That is very suprising because Siu Nim Tao itself is in part an internal (chi kung) exercise and as far as my lineage of WC is concerned we are taught supplimentary internal exercises as well. You say that you have studied SPM. A lot of this style is also internal based!

I misunderstood kung fu internals because I’m skeptical of scientifically unproven concepts!

Hah. Not enough martial artists give the scientific community enough credit for not only how vast it is, but how much money is invested in it, and how many brilliant, incredible people that have far more intelligence then you or me will ever experience.

IMHO, your lack of understanding regarding the internals has invalidated the above statements. Furthermore, you probably have not seen too many traditional combat oriented kung fu masters or sifus.

Seen plenty. Nothing has ever been demonstrated to be any more effective at internal development, then well known processes already within the scientific community.

There can be levels to the study of forms. I would even say that to be true more in the case of SPM than WC.

SPM incorporates quite a bit of dynamic tension training, as does uechi-ryu.
That doesn’t mean you need to do the form, or understand the form, to understand the dynamic tension training within it.

Also during the teachings of a given form at a given level other relevant stuff is covered. So it is not the case of “hey memorise this form and then you can go to the next level”, that is pure Mcdojo. Real kung fu schools don’t work that way.

Please tell me where can I find your real deal kung fu school?

It is subjective if the person judging this expertise is not an expert himself

No its entirely subjective by virtue of how the human brain works. No single person can determine a fact to be 100%. Even the colors you see are variables based on how your brain interprets them. One little thing goes wrong and suddenly green becomes red to you. The way the human brain interprets the experiences you have, what you see, and what you remember, is neither certain nor complete.

An expert is someone who knows everything and understands those things at a very high level. That is what I am talking about. If your kung fu school is only teaching you movements for you to memorise then please go and ask for your money back.

The point isn’t that what they teach you isn’t great.
The point is that many students aren’t great, or even good.

This is a problem in all fields of learning.

He may be a genius and should go and see James Randi. Talking of genius, lets go back to Bruce Lee. He probably was a genuis and he made what he did work for him as far as combat MA is concerned but he was no kung fu master, in the authentic/traditional sense.

So was the very first, original chinese martial artist, a kung fu master?
Can human beings, regardless of what ethnicity or level of training, with education and sense, not come to the same conclusions that some uneducated asshats did, 3000 years ago?

Unfortunately, that is not saying much.

Hah, this is about the only thing we can agree on :slight_smile:

How would one know if one has not fully completed a single style of kung fu in an AUTHENTIC school???

Who says I haven’t? Because I’m very critical of them?
If theres some kind of kung fu BJJ, show me it.

I believe that you are mixing Bruce Lee`s MMA and combat fighting prowess with his lack of traditional kung fu expertise.

TCMA don’t have exclusive rights to sensible fighting.

According to my readings Yip Man wouldn’t even teach him personally as Bruce was of mixed blood.

And according to hawkins cheung (for one), yip man really liked bruce lee.

To make such a statement would imply that you are familiar with the advanced stuff and science required to test it. Unfortunately base on what you have written in this thread I would say that you are not qualified to discuss the validity of the internals and the advanced techniques based on their mastery. Of course, I am not an expert, nor a sifu and I have never claimed to be, however my training approach has been authentic as I have been lucky enough to train with authentic kung fu sifus, hence I know enough to see the difference.

:rolleyes: Okay then. Again, show me the real kung fu. :confused:

18

[QUOTE=Hardwork108;924301]
I believe that we should see Bruce Lee for what he was. An excellent martial artist; perhaps even a genious; an innovator and finally a hero for the eventual MMA movement and not necessarily for kung fu.

Yes he did develop expertise in whatever Wing Chun that he had learnt but he had not learnt the complete style. He talked about the “classical mess” and so on. I believe that had he reached an expert level of understanding in the “classical” styles then he would have been less critical.[/QUOTE]

When UWC said “We are living Bruce Lee’s vision”, I think he forgot to add that “We” didn’t include you, HW108.

You obviously aren’t living Bruce Lee’s vision at all.

Your scenario of Bruce learning traditional classical styles completely and rejecting his JKD vision is a hypothetical. As Victor said, “It’s Kool aid” mentality to justify disagreeing with Bruce Lee: Hypothetically he would have come around if only he had learnt Biu Jee or something.:rolleyes:

The fact is he formed an opinion based on whatever he had learnt and definitely did criticize classical styles.

Tough luck to the classical people who don’t like it.

19

I think the fact that guys like Norris, Inosanto, Cheung, Lewis, LeBell and more, said that he knew his stuff, that in itself should mean quite a lot.

20

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;924403]I think the fact that guys like Norris, Inosanto, Cheung, Lewis, LeBell and more, said that he knew his stuff, that in itself should mean quite a lot.[/QUOTE]

No one is doubting Bruce Lee’s martial arts abilities. I doubt his kung fu mastery and as far as kung fu is concerned I believe that most of the guys you mentioned - Norris, LeBell, Lewis and Inosanto (?) - are not full out kung fu exponents!