One Structure in JKD?

[bobmac1967]

Dear all,

another question that I would like to ask about Jeet Kune Do.

I have heard several instructors of the art say that the three main arts (Fencing, Boxing and Wing Chun) that Bruce Lee drew from and modified that he took all of this and made it into one structure.

Can anyone please shed any light on what this actually means?

Cheers,

Bob

[bobmac1967]

Hi there,

no replies?

Bob

[Lita]

Wow! Long time from my last post!

Fencing, Boxing and Wing Chun - this were the main place that Bruce took his ideas from. To explain, Bruce was interest in writing by Jack Dempsey (boxer), and he study boxing. He learn how to punch good here. Bruce make his theory of the straight lead from Fencing, main from a fener called Aldo Nadi. The idea in fencing is to go straight to oponent. Everyody knowledge that Bruce study wing chun by Yip Man. From this arts, the five ways of attack is make.

Sorry for small explain. I would go say better, but my English is bad.

[Ghost]

Dear all,

another question that I would like to ask about Jeet Kune Do.

I have heard several instructors of the art say that the three main arts (Fencing, Boxing and Wing Chun) that Bruce Lee drew from and modified that he took all of this and made it into one structure.

Can anyone please shed any light on what this actually means?

Cheers,

Bob

it means he put them all together so they worked as one.

[Lita]

it means he put them all together so they worked as one.

Not very true. He take things from this arts and put them all together so they worked as one. Not everything from the three arts in one.

[Ghost]

Not very true. He take things from this arts and put them all together so they worked as one. Not everything from the three arts in one.

yes thats what i said.

[corwin137]

It's explained in detail in his "book". He called it the "small phasic bent knee stance" or SPBK. Small, due to the feet being relatively close together, phasic, because it's meant to be fluid/moving/adaptable/changing, bent knee for the obvious reason. The details of this depend on who you talk to- which side forward and why, what angle to have the feet (if any), distance between the feet, how much of a bend in the knee and etc.

[bobmac1967]

OK,

thanks for the replies.

My understanding of how Bruce's art evolved is that he transitioned from modified wing chun (using a touch based system) to adding (touchless) intercepting in Oakland and finally, he developed the intercepting fencing method in LA.

I'm familiar with the sources he drew from and modified - after the publication of Teri Tom's book many more people will have been able to see some of the main material that he drew on and modified in his personal development of his own art.

I have been exploring the art for quite a while now, both practically and also through reading - what has helped me the most is to understand what the root is. Since then, things have been much clearer.

In essence, what I am saying is that my understanding is that all that Bruce drew upon, he made into one cohesive structure.

What I am not so sure of is whether this is referring purely to range, weapons and stance or if it is more to do with how he was able to blend the 3 main arts he drew upon into one method of interception. Perhaps it is both?

Cheers,
Bob.

[Ghost]

OK,

thanks for the replies.

My understanding of how Bruce's art evolved is that he transitioned from modified wing chun (using a touch based system) to adding (touchless) intercepting in Oakland and finally, he developed the intercepting fencing method in LA.

I'm familiar with the sources he drew from and modified - after the publication of Teri Tom's book many more people will have been able to see some of the main material that he drew on and modified in his personal development of his own art.

I have been exploring the art for quite a while now, both practically and also through reading - what has helped me the most is to understand what the root is. Since then, things have been much clearer.

In essence, what I am saying is that my understanding is that all that Bruce drew upon, he made into one cohesive structure.

What I am not so sure of is whether this is referring purely to range, weapons and stance or if it is more to do with how he was able to blend the 3 main arts he drew upon into one method of interception. Perhaps it is both?

Cheers,
Bob.

blending, he found elements from (for example) fencing. and applied them to unarmed combat, weapons are often viewed as simply extensions of the body.
In most systems that have both armed and unarmed elements you usually find that the armed and unarmed parts are 90% the same, usually the 10% or so being given to adaptations due to range etc.
so the idea is to take things and apply them elsewhere.
i think is what you are wanting to know anyway.

The thing to learn from it is to see applications of things in anything you look at. Dont focus on what bruce lee did, that was his path and right for him in his time. learn from his approach and then find your own road.

Id go alot further in this approach than bruce lee originally did. you could find elements in american football training that can be translated to martial arts, for instance. The key is to not try to understand how bruce fought, but to try and use all the information in the world around you and apply it to your training.

[bobmac1967]

Hi Ghost,

thanks for your reply.

Yes, this is exactly how I am trying to progress my own art.

Many thanks,

Bob

[wsdddoa012]

I couldn't have said it better myself ghost: nice work!