If JKD so much better than...

[system]

Zhooter - no matter what you think about “good” taiji, you pretty much have to agree with Black Jack. There’s bad taiji out there in greater proportions than any other art. While your particular perspective might dictate that the systems BJ mentioned are “simplistic”, one thing can certainly be said about their methodology: it flushes out the pretenders really quickly.

While you might think that taiji can bring you to a higher level than those systems, you’ll have to admit that generally - it doesn’t. Whereas those systems, at the very least, do teach things useful for self-defense.

In case you might be tempted to argue that most taiji practitioners do not train appropriately for self-defense, and that this is the critical flaw of importance in this discussion: it is worth noting that poorly taught taiji also results in poor health (eg. lots of permanently damaged knees from bad taiji practice). There is clearly something both wrong and prevalent in taiji practice.

Now before you jump all over me… I actually agree with you, on some level. I think taiji is a superior fighting system - particularly a superior infighting system. It’s tactics and training methods, when done properly, are certainly among the best self-defense and health-promoting exercises available. Moreover, they are sadly overlooked by serious fighters. However, the argument I’ve outlined above is still a serious hindrance in the idea of “taiji superiority.”

I would suggest that, though it may be contrary to the trend of this forum, you two bend the discussion towards some practical points, rather than staking down your camps and verbally glaring at one another.

Zhooter - you mention training the jings for ground use. Don’t you think this would be a constructive point for elabortion in this discussion? It is, after all, the core of your argument. We both know that this is not explicitly part of the traditional taiji curriculum. How have you addressed it?

Of course, some of the basic attributes of taiji provide a wonderful foundation for groundfighting - leading with the waist, sensitivity to your opponent’s bone structure, yielding and positioning. This are all fundamentals that have been adopted by modern groundfighting systems - with much success. However, confusing the posession of those attributes on a basic level with experience utilizing them under specific situations is a dangerous mistake, wouldn’t you agree?

Perhaps you could provide some examples of how your training has addressed these points.

[system]

Braden I did not want to come across as stating that I did not think Tai Chi was an effective method of training as I have informed you before on that I think it is a fine base to go off from as long as you are learning from the right people.

To me the person I am learning from is so much more important than a generic label.

I was defending the “hybrid” crowd as that is realy where I call home on a personal level but in a number of respects I can also call myself a traditionalist as I also practice Kachin Bando and have a deep interest and respect for a number of other traditional fighting systems.

I don’t have a problem with systems, I have a problem with bad training methods.

I hope I cleared myself up a little as I did not want to sound like a blowhole

Regards

[system]

Black Jack, some of those people you mentioned have achieved advanced rank in traditional MA before starting their own teaching curriculum. And yes you are a traditionalist, so repeat after me. BJJ bad, MMA bad, Enya music good!!!

Also don’t confuse people not knowing their arse from their elbow about their arts with what an art is really about. There’s a lot of good stuff in Tai Chi, pick up Dr Yangs book Taiji Chin Na for a sample. Excellent material and very nasty too.

As to everyone else…
What new thing outside of the concepts, which are not that new at all, has JKD come up with?

[system]

Also I think that MMA has stolen some of the lime light from JKD.
<table>
<tr>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Adventure is just a romantic name for trouble. It sounds swell when you write about it, but it’s hell when you meet it face to face in a dark and lonely place.
Louis L’Amour
</td>
<td>

</td>
</tr>
</table>

[This message was edited by rogue on 05-02-01 at 07:56 PM.]

[system]

Black Jack, fair enough.

I do agree that MOST TCC schools are seriously lacking solid combative training. I’m talking more about the ideas and concepts of TCC and how the system was intended to be trained - as codified by the founding masters. Properly trained, TCC is simply one of the most complete MAs systems.

I assure you that what I’m stating isn’t based on ego and it certainly is not bs. I couldn’t care less whether anyone believes me or not. I’m not trying to proselytize or sell anything. I’m just having fun spreading the good word.

I’m familiar with the respective works of all the people you listed and have exchanged emails with several of them in the past. I have a very friendly rapport with a couple of them. Geoff Thompson is one man whom I have the highest respect for. He doesn’t pretend to have pulled his knowledge out of a vaccuum like some of the others on your list.

Vlad Vasiliev is someone you failed to list. His real world experience and knowledge dwarfs those of most others, and some of them are even man enough to admit it. His own training in the former Soviet Union is the most disturbing stuff imaginable. When men like Thompson, Vunak and Vasiliev share something, I’m all eyes and ears. When I modify my own training based on what they share, I know it’s rock-solid and I can take it to the streets in good faith.

The thing about some of the guys on your list is that they gained their knowledge by lurking on the side-lines, observing the misfortune of others. They have no experience in or out of the ring. These are often the first guys who’ll denigrate the hard work some traditionalists put into their own training just because they don’t buy the tapes or tender their deference to the modern Way.

They have names for such free thinkers. If they dare question the work of certain modern combatives gurus, it’s an attack, and their drones come out in force with labels like idiot, fool, wazzooo kung fu, delusional, etc. Then, they demand that their material be approached with an open mind when they haven’t extended that courtesy to considering the merits of traditional systems. Their logic is skewed and their standards doubled. hehehe

If a person digs deep into the Tai Chi Classics, Tao Te Ching, Art Of War, The Book Of Five Rings, etc, they’ll find everything that the guys you listed are teaching. And much more. If they apply their studies to the art as it was meant to be trained, they’ll be doing the same stuff those other guys are doing anyway.

TCC is conceptual in its scope and definite in its purpose. It isn’t limited to a specific modality. It’s universal in tactic and application. It trains the player to think for themself. It trains the fighter to act without preconceived ideas and strategies. It’s whole philosophical basis is one of adaptability and change. Its simplicity is born of its vast complexity. Its an all-encompassing system of personal development and wellness.

It’s a system of efficient biomechanics and breathing skill, tendon and joint strengthening, muscle tuning, self-chiropractic skills, touchless self-acupressure, meditation, and martial skill. Sun Tzu’s treatises on warfare are indispensable in studying the tactical potential of any system. No different for Tai Chi. Tao Te Ching is equally valuable in embracing the deeper understanding of what compels us to be, and to do in our lives. One can’t go far in life just studying the actions of combat. Scholarly introspection and meditation are the gateways to higher learning in MAs study. In this regard, Tai Chi is one of the most complete MAs on the planet. It combines movement, energy management, basic strategy and philosophy with infinite methods of striking, grappling, throwing, choking, locking and weapons. It’s everything JKD tries to be, and more. It’s everything modern combatives systems try to be, and more. It’s everything and nothing. Of course, my opinion is biased.

Tai Chi isn’t a prescribed way of fighting. It transcends up-right or horizontal modality. It’s a training enhancement regimen unequalled in depth and simplicity. It’s a health system and a way of life that brings one to the other side of
worrying about fighting or kicking @$$. It has no name or form. It’s The Way.

The situation as it is now, is that other modern combatives people are teaching the use of certain elements of Tai Chi’s tactical stuff as a part of their (insert acronym here) ___ system. How well these things have been received by the masses only validates what many Tai Chi people have known all along about the postures and their applications. And yes, the same postures they teach are both offensive and defensive in Tai Chi as well. Ward-off, double Ward-off, Press and Push are being done almost identically to Tai Chi in some systems. The mental game may be different in nuance, but the set-up tactics are also quite similar. The verbal stuff is unique to (insert acronym here) _____ only superficially, and really, no-one is privy to the value or skill of defusing through dialogue. The tactical integration of the flinch response isn’t anything new either. This has been the catalyst to Tai Chi’s proactive/reactive ‘action’ all along. The means of arriving at the same conclusions may be vastly different in either of these systems, but the end result is the same.

Black Belt magazine - April 2001 - For illustrative purposes of Tai Chi’s
tactical universality, a few examples are given here:

Pg 23. Paul Vunak advertisement - The picture on the left shows Mr Vunak applying Tai Chi’s Fan-through-back. The picture on the right shows Tai Chi’s Shuttles.

Pg 36. Sgt. Jim Wagner is shown in figure 1 applying Tai Chi’s Pull-down. In figure 3, he is shown applying Tai Chi’s Split.

Pg 40. Zhen-Kang Sun is shown applying the same Tai Chi Split. Albeit in a Pa Kua context.

Pg 57. Advertisement for Bas Rutten’s videos - The top picture shows him applying Tai Chi’s Golden-rooster posture.

Pg 60. Strike Force advertisement - Bottom left picture shows the same Golden-rooster posture with a different application.

Further, a straight-right hand counter to a Thai-style leg kick is the same as Brush-knee-twist-step. Upper-cuts are the same as Fan-through-back and Shuttles. Not to mention all the low, low-line kicks to ankles and shins, eye attacks, elbow-strikes, shoulder-strikes, body-checks, etc.

On ground-fighting, a scissor-sweep is Split done with the legs. Passing the opponent’s head to the side into a guilliotine from your guard is another apllication of Split. Grabbing your trapped arm and stacking the opponent while they attempt an armlock or triangle is Press. a Quasimodo is Pull-down. A fore-arm choke while grabbing the opposite collar is Ward-off. A shoulder-strike from mount is Shoulder-strike. The list goes on…

For the few of us TCC guys who do fight in NHB and compete in submission grappling, the truth of what we can do individually with our basic skills is immediately apparent. Several of my past jobs required that I have a much closer relationship with reality than I do with sport though. That’s what we’re talking about in regard to Tai Chi afterall.

So, while your experiences are much the same as my own in trying to find hard-core Tai Chi as it was meant to be trained, I would still say that what was originally trained and codified by the founding masters, and what is being trained in my school and a few others around the world is as complete as anything else out there.

[This message was edited by Zhooter on 05-02-01 at 10:20 PM.]

[system]

Great stuff Zhooter.

<table>
<tr>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Adventure is just a romantic name for trouble. It sounds swell when you write about it, but it’s hell when you meet it face to face in a dark and lonely place.
Louis L’Amour
</td>
<td>

</td>
</tr>
</table>

[system]

Rogue,

Not to be argumentative (and I’ll explain why in a moment), but what exposure have you had to JKD besides marketing?

Obviously, Vunak’s ads are going to make JKD sound like the greatest thing since fire because that’s precisely what marketing is supposed to do.

I have to agree that the JKD instructors you see in the media are often self promotional. But then, so are many other instructors you see in the media. If they weren’t promoting something, they wouldn’t be writing for a magazine. They may be promoting their particular school, style, idea, or whatever, but the net effect is the same.

Take a traditional style, say shotokan (nope, I’ve got nothing against shotokan). Articles on shotokan are going to focus on what’s good about shotokan, obviously. So why wouldn’t articles on JKD focus on what’s good about JKD?

Sometimes (often), they’re entirely too heavy handed about this “traditional vs. JKD” thing. I believe it’s possible to talk of JKD without belittling other styles. Personally, I regard Dan Inosanto as the exemplar for JKD. I’ve never heard him speak ill of other styles. He certainly promotes JKD, but not at the expense of others, in my limited experience.

So has JKD really created anything new? I don’t know. You could debate that one for the rest of your life and not gain anything. But my feeling is that it’s difficult to base an opinion on the media, because there’s always an angle. But then, what else is there for most of us to base it on aside from direct experience?

Stuart

[system]

Relativity and Self-determination

>>“What new thing outside of the concepts, which are not that new at all, has JKD come up with?”<<

The positive contribution of JKD has been its IDEA which has liberated 1000s from stylistic dogma and turned them on to the ideas of relative truth and self-determination.

The seeds of sedition? Maybe, and in some cases, yes. But…

Truth is relative though, and we could all do well to be at peace with that idea.

Everyone is free to chose for themselves and those who chose to adhere to another’s truth are only victims of their own dysfunction afterall.

In the martial arts world, dysfunctionality is the bridge for many who can neither create order, nor adapt to chaos. They aspire to creating order and surviving chaos through the regimentation of a stylized martial Way. They chose to follow another’s Way because they lack direction and a sense of orientation in their personal journey. They see something in their teacher which resonates with their own ideas, but they still lack the experience to exercise self-determination with true confidence. They resign themselves to the study of another’s Way in order to affect order and adaptability in their own mental and physical dynamic.

Whichever martial system they subscribe to doesn’t matter as long as the individual evolves in their entire being instead of improving according to the dogma of their chosen system. Evolution is the path of one’s own Way. No-one can prescribe evolution. The teacher can only impart basic strategies of adaptability and the acquiring of body-awareness to suit the moment.

Martial art isn’t stylistic. It’s deeply personal and its truth exists for the individual who doesn’t delude them self or others. Honesty is the greatest virtue. It speaks to us through the heart. It can’t be denied lest we allow ego to rule. Delusion is the cur of ego. It undermines honor, integrity and justice so as to preserve ego’s ruling ways. If one’s sense of honor or integrity is sound, they have no need to trouble themselves with the words and deeds of others. Their sense of justice is enough to keep them vigilant over their own thoughts and deeds.

Proselytizing doesn’t increase the art of one person. Personal expression is the essence of martial art. No-one can bestow the title of ‘martial stylist/artist’ upon another. To believe otherwise is the seed of elitism. It limits truth - thus rendering it absolute. It nullifies the relativity of truth and sets one on a long and perilous search for another’s truth. Each of us must find that truth to be our own, and respect others as they search for their own truth.

Thus, truth is relative.

Philosophy:

Philosophy isn’t a definitive or absolute thing. It’s personal and variable. The only constant is the virtue of peacefulness. Being at peace with life means not being concerned with what doesn’t affect us in a direct and harmful manner. Is it the teacher’s responsibility to impart the philosophy of their system? My opinion is that it isn’t a teacher’s responsibility to impress upon the student any virtue beyond that of honesty with oneself and others. Humility cannot be taught. Nor can respect or discipline. Martial virtue develops and evolves as the student puts in the time.

A teacher’s talent lies in their ablility to provide guidance so that students come around on their own as they begin to appreciate their long-term involvement within a group dynamic and their constructive contribution to their MAs community.

Trust is given before it’s received. Self-discipline is taught through example. Virtue is gained through trust and discipline. Every thing else is falsified by responding to what the peer pressure within a group dynamic exerts upon each individual.

To gain higher virtue in one’s MAs training, we must throw open the doors and let everyone in. The truly deserving are those who endure, and forego the complications of ego gratification. In the meantime, put ‘em all through the wringer and see what comes out the other side. This is the only formula for imparting the virtue of true honesty in the training. The training should make honest people of us all if we strive to balance its challenges with the jagged edge of our physical endurance and our mental/emotional limits. No belts or sashes, nor positive reinforcement is going to replace the truth of where one stands in their own development. That truth is discerned through hard contact and the conquering of self/fear/ego.

Self-determination:

What a person does with their own knowledge is not a reflection of what they’ve learned from their teacher. When a person goes out on their own and begins sharing their knowledge with others, the most important thing they can receive in preparing them for that moment is the truth of what they can and can’t do no matter how deep their theoretical knowledge of a thing.

If the teacher has failed to impart the virtue of honesty to the student, then the time they invested in that student has been wasted. The student will never stand on their own legs and will always rely on the good name of their teacher to lend themselves credibility among their peers.

I think everyone who follows the instruction of a teacher will have a moment in their lives where they look at what the teacher taught them in a new light. One that shines upon the teacher’s own failings to impart things which become clear to them in their own understanding and unique perspective. When that moment arrives in their awareness of what they were taught and how it differs from their own current epiphany, they’ll think of the instructor and say “You bastard”

It should be the hope of every instructor that their student will have that “you bastard” moment. It’ll indicate their breaking free of the instructor’s dogma and formulating one that applies to them as an individual. That’s the only thing any instructor can reasonably claim to teach - The path to self-determination.

An instructor may be able prepare someone to fight and fight well using all their mental and physical attributes, but their own Way is something the instructor can’t teach. An instructor shouldn’t pretend to teach anything - Just show everything they know.

What the student does with the information is up to them. The instructor can’t sell it and they can’t claim ownership to the truth. Nor can they hold anyone to it through their own dogma. Once the student has it, it’s theirs. They’re free to find their own Way and be at ease with the divergence from the common path, to that of their own self-determination.

Truth is relative…

[This message was edited by Zhooter on 05-03-01 at 05:00 PM.]

[system]

apoweyn, jkd was what I was studying right before I took up karate.

I really don’t have a problem with JKD, if someone wanted to get some good skills in 6 months it’s what I’d recommend, I also hold Dan Inosanto in very high regard as a martial artist as he masters arts instead of sampling them, and I’ve felt Vunaks past efforts to present his streamlined approach to self defense as praise worthy.

The main problem I have is with many of the students. Most of whom have never mastered a traditional art but feel as if they have some grain of truth that traditionalists just don’t see. They repeat the same tired Bruce Lee quotes about being formless and without style, but then dismiss any art that is not on the JKD approved list. Style is as much about what you exclude as what you include. I’ve heard more than one say that JKD is made up of the best of certain arts. It must be something to know what the best of an art is never having studied it.

What set me off on my latest "students of JKD rant"™ was a guy at work, been doing JKD for all of about a year, saw me reading The Karate Dojo by Peter Urban during lunch and launches off into why karate is not effective. It’s got to be a script because out come the Bruce Lee quotes, the reasons why a Thai roundhouse is superior and it’s unstoppable man, and of course JKD is made up of the best of the best arts.

I have to work with this guy so it’s better to vent here than on the job. And hey I like it when all the JKD guys pull out the script and reading the Bruce Lee quotes.

<table>
<tr>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Adventure is just a romantic name for trouble. It sounds swell when you write about it, but it’s hell when you meet it face to face in a dark and lonely place.
Louis L’Amour
</td>
<td>

</td>
</tr>
</table>

[system]

Rouge…

I can understand where your comming from. But, please, don’t take it out on JKD as a whole. Marketing is dumb and too many people should really be careful about what they advertise and how they teach. This guy you work with is an idiot and needs some sense beatin into him. Personally, I don’t care for karate because I prefer the fluidic (is that even a word?) movements of Kung Fu, but I’m not gonna say that Karate is worthless. It must have something good since it’s been around so long! This guy is a bruce lee obsessor. I have a friend who’s one, and it’s plain annoying. I understand your need to rant, but don’t bash all of us JKDers. Not everyone is the same.

-Kymus

~Crosstraining is the key~
-Sifu Rick Tucci
www.pamausa.com

[system]

The first JKD guy to finally formulate the perfect curriculum with all the best stuff in it will be practicing one day, and a Tai Chi player will come up to him and say - “Hey, that’s a really nice form. Where’d you learn Tai Chi?”

[system]

Kymus, most of my experiences with JKD have been positive. Big Sean has always been a good representitive of JKD, courteous and friendly. Most of the instructors I’ve worked with have been good too. What I have a problem with are those that take from other arts with one hand and throw dirt on them with the other. This usually comes from students who either couldn’t muster up the dedication and patience to make headway in a traditional art, like me, or just were more comfortable with a non-traditional art. But they blame the art and not themselves or just chalking it up to different strokes.

Isn’t Tai Chi just karate done really slow?

<table>
<tr>
<td>
</td>
<td>
Adventure is just a romantic name for trouble. It sounds swell when you write about it, but it’s hell when you meet it face to face in a dark and lonely place.
Louis L’Amour
</td>
<td>

</td>
</tr>
</table>

[system]

no

Karate is taiji done quickly

Karate flows as well as any other art can flow - when trained properly.

I don’t know about other MA’s, but in Taiji if my form is identical to my instructors then I’m doing it wrong - he shows me the way to teach myself, to make it ‘My’ taiji. If I’m not feeling the principles I know I should be, then I have to adjust until I do.

I guess what I’m saying is there’s so much in my art for me to distill, to take out what is ‘good’ for me, that I wonder if I’ll have the time to look at another art to take what is ‘good’ from that. It also seems to change with time - what didn’t work 6 months ago is now my one of my most effective techniques.

I’m the only person who can decide what is good from an art - because it has to work for me, not my instructor. So the JKD schools that show you snippets of a system that the instructor has decided are worthwhile are imho, at fault. The schools that teach a whole system and allow the student to strip away what is wrong for him are on the right track but I still think are faulty UNLESS they continue to teach the system. As my understanding of my art grows, so too does my proficiency - techniques improve. I change.

As someone said Dan Inosanto seems to have the right idea. I’m probably stoking some huge internecine JKD war here

“one room, many keys”

[system]

“I’m the only person who can decide what is good from an art - because it has to work for me, not my instructor.”

That’s exactly what I believe and exactly my point. If JKD is without form and open minded then it can not restrict itself to only the arts that Inosanto, Vunak or Golden (all very fine instructors and martial artists) practice and teach.

I couldn’t get comfortable with Wing Chun, but I know the problem was with me and not the art. I found JKD lacking but the problem is not JKD, it’s what I want out of an art. I used to think that karate style training was archaic and useless, kata were worthless. Now I can’t imagine a day where I don’t at least run through all my kata 2 or 3 times, and on an average day try and pull a new technique out of one.

Now the question, did the training and kata change, or did I?

Adventure is just a romantic name for trouble. It sounds swell when you write about it, but it’s hell when you meet it face to face in a dark and lonely place.
Louis L’Amour

[system]

JKD is not dependent on karata,
Lee stoped using that after he
ripped Chuck Norris’s chest hair off
in Rome.
Ask the kitty.

[system]

rogue

You changed,if you’re comfortable
with karata you can apply any “concept”
too it

[system]

Who cares where it comes from ?..

Just as long as the individual can use it regardlesss of system(WING CHUN,NORTERN MANTIS,HUNG GAR,CHOY LAY FUT,WESTERN BOXING,FENCING,TKD,AIKIDO,TANG SOO DO JUDO,JUJITSU,SAVATE,JUNFAN JKD,JKD CONCEPTS,KALI,PENTJAK SILAT,MANDE MUDA,MUAY THAI)is what matters most at least thats how I feel about the subject…

It’s not about who’s Systems way of fighting is better then who’s… As each System may have someting to offer…Now what exactly is it that these systems have to offer the individual?.. Is up to him…

RAYNYSC

[system]

To study JKD…

If you want to study JKD you have to make the most of it. You have to make it your own, your instructor cant do this for you. What I mean by this is simple. Just dont use the techniques you dont like :). LoL at the person that stated that JKD is the same as tai chi. It would look exactly the same if we did it really slow and non-contact ;). Another problem ppl have is constantly stating that JKD is better than this or that. It’s not better because ITS NOT A STYLE, it’s truly just a set of concepts. This own forum is an example of this. The summary explanation of the JKD forum in which it states that JKD is a new form of kung-fu??? o well…

[This message was edited by Grappling-Insanity on 05-09-01 at 11:18 AM.]

[This message was edited by Grappling-Insanity on 05-09-01 at 11:20 AM.]

[This message was edited by Grappling-Insanity on 05-09-01 at 11:21 AM.]