Bullsh it, Bruce Lee turned out good students.
Some of them have since gone and messed “it” up.
HIIIIYYYYYYYYYYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!
WHoahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!
Bullsh it, Bruce Lee turned out good students.
name one student that Bruce “turned out” from no training to Bruce trained and is actually good.
The best jkd’ers kept their original traditional arts and picked up some concepts from Bruce. Bruce got as much from these guys as they got from him.
cheers
What I believe the idea of JKD is:
Using Brucy’s analogy of cup and water:
Teacher:
~Place an empty cup on the table~
“is this empty ?”
Student:
“Sure !”
Teacher:
“Not really”
~Takes cup away, leaving nothing~
“Thats empty”
Student:
Teacher:
“When one starts down the path of martial arts, we all begin with an empty cup. There is nothing in it. But that does not mean we are truely empty. We still have a cup but we are not really aware of it..
The knowledge we gain through we training and education is like water filling up the cup. We can see the water, no problem. It is only when we accumulate a certain amount of water can the water form the shape of the cup. And it is only then can we truely see that the cup exists. The fact that water itself does not take any shape naturally, the fact that it is taking shape now, as well as seeing the different shapes it can take by looking at other people’s water can lead up to see by inference that the cup exists. When one day in the future, you are able shatter the cup can your water flow freely without limits. Capable of taking any shape. Be it a teapot or bottle”
Student
~END~
I think the the problem about JKD artists today is that most people is merely teaching with either an empty or half-filled cup.
Chinwooer-
any student who fails to understand that metaphor is just simply an idiot. 
the whole water metaphor in use with the idea of learning has been around for centuries and spans cultures and time. It is an obvious analogy afterall.
I am amazed by people who don’t understand these simple analogies. They are used afterall to make it simple to understand.
However, filled, empty, whatever. What is important is applied principle, correct transmission of the principle and an explanation of how to apply it.
Openess to the lesson is a pre-req in any study. It takes longer to learn if you keep interupting the lesson. Questions are essential of course if you still don’t fully understand.
cheers
But Kung Lek.
One you start to use the term “principle” you are going back to cupped water knowledge !
Danger ! Danger !!
No worries, I understand what you are trying to say.
What I am just trying to display is the what the JKD people today are operating by.
Actually, You will be surprised at how many people I know who didn’t understand the analogy
Ted Wong.
Kung Lek said
"The best jkd’ers kept their original traditional arts and picked up some concepts from Bruce. "
From what I have seen of many jkd practitioners, there is a great desire to experiment with and acquire techniques, but very little in the way of overall principles or philosophy through which to employ these techniques. It’s almost like someone running around with an armful of clothes hangers (techniques) and no wardrobe to hang them up in (guiding philosophy).
I’d say this is why the “best” jkd’ers, as Kung Lek says, kept their original arts and added to them.
Just a thought.
Shucks Yenhoi, you beat me to it. Ted Wong is my sigong. His art is June Fan JKD and it’s alive, though maybe not so well. What I know of it is some really cool training drills that may come with their own technique, but are easily importable into other style’s practice. Also, a few techniques, the 5 principles of attack, and a subset of Wing Chun’s trapping hands that is favored in JFJKD.
Good stuff, believe you me.
Posted by JKDChick on Bullshido
I’m a Vunak apologist. I admit it. I’m not ashamed.
When I was training with him, someone asked “Do you think JKD is starting to go down-hill?”
He got this pained expression on this face and said something like “It’s already there. That’s why we’re PFS.”
I counted about 8 counts of “JKD” in Vunaks Black Belt ad. As an art “JF/JKD” is fine, as a training philosophy “JKD” is fine, but right now JKD is largely a marketing device.
All names of arts/styles are mainly marketing devices.
Ted Wong exponents are okay in my book.
Wow. Some really good answers in this thread. Radhnoti’s was a brilliant start.
There are too many good posts here for me to comment on them all, even if only to second them. So here’s a group “amen” on the posts so far.
The only thing I would comment on is the observation that you just need to watch MMA to see real JKD. I’ll agree that the central philosophy of MMA is very similar to that of many JKD teachers. But that doesn’t really answer the question at hand.
First of all, JKD’s tenets are abstract and interpretive enough that not everyone sees JKD and MMA as being analogous. For some, the most salient part of JKD is the straightforward streetfighting. According to Bruce Lee, the two primary targets are the eyes and the groin (Tao of Jeet Kune Do). Neither of which are legal targets in the UFC. The eyes aren’t even legal in Pride, surely.
Other JKDists might say, though, that MMA fulfills a more important aspect of JKD philosophy than that. The ability to practice maneuvers in real time. Learning to swim by actually swimming.
But even then, even if those JKDists do find their art analogous with MMA, I still don’t think it’s a useful statement to say “just look at MMA to see real JKD.”
If guys who have never trained with a JKD teacher are excelling at MMA and guys who have trained in JKD are not, then that doesn’t suggest that MMA is JKD. What you’re seeing is MMA. And the question for JKDists should be “how do I get there?”
To say that MMA represents good JKD is just as much a fallacy as when (for example) a wing chun proponent points at good boxing and says “that illustrates good wing chun theory.” Why is a practitioner of a different art illustrating the worth of yours?
Stuart B.
What I meant by the above post (which is a bit overblown, quite frankly) is this:
I killed JKD. In the library. With the candlestick.
Stuart B.
I wasn’t saying that mma = jkd by any means. My only point was that bruce’s thought of taking what’s useful and discarding all else, and swimming by actually swimming are illustrated wonderously in mma.
you killed jkd? I thought the butler did it!
Originally posted by SevenStar
I wasn’t saying that mma = jkd by any means. My only point was that bruce’s thought of taking what’s useful and discarding all else, and swimming by actually swimming are illustrated wonderously in mma.
No, sorry mate. I know you weren’t. But it’s a common statement regarding JKD these days.
And I framed the butler, bending people’s preconceived notions of domestic servitude and blunt force trauma to my advantage.
Muahaha…
…
What was the question?
Stuart B.
does that mean that the suspicion is off me now that ap confessed?