Is JKD all it's cracked up to be? Is JKD really affective?

[Brokenmace]

JKD is more a philosophy than a martial art. You are thinking of Jun Fan Gungfu. Jun Fan is the martial vehicle used to express JKD in a martial way. It is a set of principles that illustrate JKD. It is not the totallity of JKD. JKD has no such limitations. JKD is a way of thinking about and approaching life. Any set of principles whose final purpose is self-perfection/expression/growth is a vehicle for JKD. This is one reason why Lee finally wished he hadn't named his art. People would think (as you do, apparently), that it could only apply to the martial arts. It is larger than that.

Notice, I didn't say basketball was JKD. I said Michael Jordan practiced JKD. By this, I don't mean that following the rules of basketball are JKD; I mean that excelling at basketball, despite obsticles, is the performance of JKD. Not allowing defeat to overcome your drive to grow and achieve is part of JKD. As Jordan has said, he's lost many times. This didn't stop him from becoming possibly the best athlete of his generation, as Lee was possibly the best martial artist of his generation.

It is not what is performed, but how and why it is performed that makes JKD what it is. Not the game but the goal and execution of the game.

A man who learns the set motions of Jun Fan and refuses to go further is not practicing JKD. The baseball player who continually pushes his abilities and endurance in order to grow is practicing JKD.

JKD is just a name. It is the doing that makes it valuable, not the saying.

[robertlee]

With the points you introduced I can agree with most jkd is to be used as a vehicle to asorb the personal needs of the person towards self discovery and yes it can bleed to other aspects of ones choice bascketball football ect. I get your point on that subject But Bruce utilized his JKD in the aspect of personal selfdefence stratigy first finding the need to better understand his personal weakness after his fight with Wong Jack in the oakland jun fan instutute after that point he radicalized has training curriculam in a rapid advancement towards what later became the building blocks of jkd slowly adding and taking away the various tools to improve and simlipfy its course of development thow his path was not complete the fondation has been layed to which the jorney to the discovery of jkd must start at the base of its structure then one may carry on its idea towards other aspects in life To keep jkd alive I think one must explore first the martial side of its devlopment then open its door to the aspects of enlightment jkd is understanding ones needs but some kind of format must acompany those needs be it gungfu or basketball Im still at the belief it was first meant to devlop the foundation of fighting skills first and harmony of movement action and self discovery but i just offer my veiw if you disagree it is fine that you do so

[Brokenmace]

As a historical matter, you are probably correct. I would only add that we know Bruce Lee was something of a Taoist, and Taoism is the basis of much of JKD. Therefore I can't be certain which came first: the philosophy or the martial art. I do know they developed together after whichever came first.

This is an open question, one that Dan Inosanto and others that knew BL might be able to answer.

Probably it doesn't matter too much. After all, his whole intent was growth of personal expression. He probably would love that we are even having this debate.

I also agree with you that the martial art needs to be learned first before one branches out to other things, otherwise one's efforts become unfocused and the result of happenstance.

To go further with the Michael Jordan metaphor, he might have been even more fantastic had his mental training been molded by JKD instruction. We'll never know.

[robertlee]

you are very correct both the aspects must be asorbed to make jkd a useful aproach to self understanding and yes jordan may have gone much further thanks for sharing your thoughts

[Patrick G.]

Originally posted by crazyjoe380
will jkd be as good as it was suppose to be, seeing that bruce lee isn't around to correct everything.. the mistakes, the errors, the way things are done.

i've seen jkd represented in ufc and it lost to ken shamrock. it won some fights but he went to the ground and did some submissions.. no jkd was used.

JKD does not make the fighter. The fighter makes the fighter.

It's 90% the individual, 10% the system.

Billy and Bob are in a gunslingin' showdown. Billy draws faster than Bob and shoots Bob in the chest before he gets a chance to draw his gun. Does that mean Billy has the best gun?

[Szczepankiewicz]

No, it means that Bob dropped jelly from his jelly donut into his holster and glued his pistol in place.

Moral of the story: Don't listen to Rush Limbaugh.


Ok, maybe my analogy is actually a disanalogy, but you get the pint yeah?

[holte2]

why didnt billy and bob just try to talk about their problems? Maybe it was just a simple misunderstanding..the ladies on "The View" say that is the best way...

[robertlee]

How the art is represented is the person. study it , learn it , do it, Then the fighter is the art. Billy had to train with the gun to be the better with the gun . Your point is taken as correct. Unless the person can function as a fighter the tools wont work. All part of the whole.

[Sean J]

Originally posted by Patrick G.


JKD does not make the fighter. The fighter makes the fighter.

It's 90% the individual, 10% the system.

....

I think this pretty much describes the philosophy of JKD as well. Jesse R. Glover usually says about his Non-Classical Gung Fu that it is not a system - it is a process. In recent videotaped interview he explained this more closely: It is not a closed system, but a learning process that should make the practitioner find his own strong points and develop these.

This should also be the point in JKD whether you call it "concepts", "Jun Fan" or whatever.

[crazyjoe380]

^^

so a dork who doesn't know shit. even to throw a jab wouldnt be able to use jkd then right?

cause a fighter makes the fighter..

so a jkd school.. only established fighters can attend right?

[hjohnson]

"With the right grip - which is rather strangulation than a choke"

Hey Sean J

What actually is the proper method of choking? Is it more a shut off of the air supply OR the blood flow to the brain?

Thanks.

[quietanswer]

None of these arguments and theories and really existed amongst men that could fight.

Certainly, You see in Kung Fu movies guys saying "phoenix Turd system can destroy Fainting Snowman".. So you might think that's similar to asking if JKD is functional. But first off, that's a movie..Second off, it's no different than arguing if Machado can destroy a Gracie.

But in the timeframe before guns, people fought and saw people fighting (I assume, right?).. And so a lot of these questions were pretty moot. Living in america, and NOT living in a ghetto, I don't see many fights (outside of when I was in highschool, and not too many there, really).. So there weren't a lot of arguments about "can a little guy beat a biggun'"...cause they saw it happen often enough. and vice versa, and it was understood if the Biggun' was dough boy banker, and the small guy was a field worker with calloused hands who often continued working the field even through an injury..well, the banker better shut up, heavyweight or no..

And that is sort of how I was raised, in a laborer family, with 140 pound laborer men. Dad didn't take a lot of shit, and it was rarely a smaller guy screwing with him..

But asking if JKD is functional is a very "sitting in my arm chair watching pro wrestling" kind of thing to ask.

Fighting makes a fighter. Conditioning makes a fighter. Functional strength makes a fighter. FUNCTIONAL strength.. JKD does not make anyone a fighter. If the guy practicing JKD performs against resisting opponents, then he can probably fight.

A man wrestling his girlfriend every night has a better chance of winning a fight than a JKD man who only does focus mitts and thai pads and point sparring.

Fighting is a chaos, a confusion. If you can perform under that specific chaos, you're ok. If you have been in the chaos, you will probably do better than someone who is gaping, trying to do Rising Blocks, and wondering why he keeps getting punched.

But FIGHTING is the true teacher, the true style. Some guy shows you some movements. Then you take into fighting, and learn how to use it. The Tae Kwon Do guy might be real tough in class, but when people start taking him down, boxing him, putting him in the clinch and tearing him an ass..well, he's not so tough. Cause his opponents are fighting by his narrow guidelines.

If a guy is willing to get punched repeatedly, and show up at the gym again tomorrow to get punched some more..and show up the next day with a sore body and aching head for more..then HIS system will make him a good fighter.

If he isn't..then he won't be.. Same goes for wrestling. If you can handle the repeated takedowns, the frustration of feeling like you are your opponents rotten stepchild as he throws you and pins you and chokes everyday..and you show up tomorrow to get more..then you are going to get better at fighting.

However, if you are interested in not getting punched, thrown, or choked, you will not learn to deal with being punched thrown or choked. Everything in life works this way.

Gaping at pretty girls does not get them into bed with you. You have step up and say hello and make one laugh. If she shits on you, turns you down, and walks away, you have to step up to another, say hello, and talk a little. This is the only way to get laid. It is also the only way to fight. It is the only way to live.

Theorizing about life is not living. It is fear, and fear reaction.

I am talking from experience, because I have much experience with letting my fears control me. Do not think I am putting myself on a pedestal, even though I talk like an asshole. I am guilty of all these mistakes I am bringing up, myself. That's why I'm bringing them up. I held many wrong ideas through the years. Why were they wrong? Because they were merely ideas. And fighting isn't about an exchange of ideas.

However, Americans, with their cushy lives, prefer ideas over fighting. Fighting as an idea is great with most of us..fighting as a reality of DOING IT is not, with most of us... Rolling with a sweaty hairy dude who keeps causing you lots of pain, every day, month in, month out, is not an idea. It's a sweaty, painful, learning experience.

but like I say, I'm not a tough guy.. these are just my words..

[AAAhmed46]

Jkd, in its fighting form, seems very simply like a military combat. Rough and rugged, but is equally effective as thai boxing or shotokan(real). To learn jeet kune do simply helps you do this:


My name is Luke skywalker . I went and learned monkey fist. Now i want to learn jkd. I do, and learn the philosophy. Now i learn bando and mantis kungfu. Now, because i studied jkd philosophy, i now am better at eliminating wastful techniques in both styles of fighting and take only that actually works.



The fighting system it self seems rather bland, but jkd seem to stem toward being learned AFTER someone has learned a fighting style rather then learning it itself.

CAREFUL, THE FOLLOWING INFO MAY BE INACCURATE.

I HEARD that brucey wanted people to learn jkd after learning another dicipline, since they whole meaning of jkd may be applied, so that they can get rid of what is complicated and wasteful in the art they previosly learned(and jkd) and use only what THEY can wield in the art.


i HAVE seen expert martial artists discuss such things like this, discussing jeet kune do as a CONCEPT and not a fighting art. Infact, jeet kune do is not even a concept. It is more so "advice" for someone learning thier art. Tells them to be critical.

[quietanswer]

About the Bruce Lee thing:

If you check out the book of his life story, written by his wife, you'll find that her take on the matter is:

Bruce prefered for noone to know anything, so they had no bad habits to unlearn. It made it easier for him also to see how the person naturally moved, so he could help that person FIND how they move, fight and problem solve naturally.

Is that true? Hell if I know.

I don't care much about what Bruce did. You don't need Bruce or what he did, to learn to fight.

Fighting is free and available.

JKD makes noone a fighter. It is taught differently everywhere. One school I saw used a Tae Kwon Do basis, with a belt system and high kicks and all that crap.. with a second Eclectic Styles class that met on different nights, same students. That teacher said taht was JKD.

Some JKD guys would NEVER touch tae kwon do.


It is not what your teacher CALLS HIS ART. It is how you train, and how similar it is to fighting. If you go "all the way" and fight, then you are probably going to get much better than some guy who just wants to learn to do a Jump Spinning Rear Heel Kick like chuck norris can.

But like I'm saying, what Bruce did 30 years ago is pretty irrelevant to developing your own fighting game. He says this many times in Tao of Jeet Kune Do. That book is HIS Jeet Kune Do, and noone should replicate it.

Everyone has their own system of defense. the way to find out what works for you is to get to know you while people are trying to hit, throw, or choke you.

A guy can do progressive drills and all that, and I like some of those drills. But a guy has gotta fight with them, or the guy who gets in a fight once a month at the local 7-11 is going to have an advantage on the Driller/MittHitter. I don't care how fast someone can hit focus mitts. It aint fighting. It's hitting mitts.

[crazyjoe380]

That is the reason why i wont take any classes that say JEET KUN DO.. or what ever..


i'll take muay thai and bjj and hope that it will be enough.