# the principle behind the bai jong?



## Colbey (Jun 5, 2005)

Hello people



Im starting this topic in order to answer a few questions I have about jkd. I have a few of his books, namely the tao of jkd and a book on bruce lees combat method.

 Obviously his ideas revolve around what works, discarding what doesnt. he takes his many punching ideas from boxing, and kicking from savate and muay thai. He the incorporates self defece ideas into this, ie all the techniques that cannot b performed in a ring.

  Lol the point Im getting to is that many if his strikes come from the sports combat arts ( boxing, muay thai, and I guess to an extend bjj and other grappling arts in the ground work)

 What I would like to focus on is the similarities between his stand up fighting: same punches, same kicks (although these are often geared to a self defence side), same footwork, same evasion.

 However he employs a completely different stance, to the afore mentioned muay thai. They favour a more square position, allowing fore easier, and faster use of the cross, and other rear hand punches. Also their legs are more squared to make themselves less vulnerable to the shin side kick.

  Fair enough, this may be because the number one principle of jkd is interception and counter attacking, and made more use of his lead side, but is that the only reason why he chooses to make his more powerful rear hand weapons much slower.



So I guess my main question is what are the specific reasons why he chose the bai jong, compared to a muay thai stance, when the stand up fighting techniques they use are very similar.

 Is it because the bai jong is more of a defensive postion, and defense is paramount in a street situation, compared to a glove ring where the combatants are morelikely to trade punches with each other?



On a similar note is there another reason why he also reaches for parries, apart from the hand trapping possibilities that do not exist in a ring?





Thanks in advance


----------



## KyleShort (Jun 5, 2005)

Well there are about a million and one ways to answer your questions.  For simplicity, look at the arts that primarily influenced the development of this art...Wing Chun, Fencing, Boxing.  Alot of the stance and footwork comes from fencing, 'nuff said.

More generally speaking though, there are advantages to a bai jong-like stance when you consider things like weapons...you present a smaller profile and less of a target, your most powerful and skilled weapons (dominant) have less space to travel to the target, your organs like the heart are farther from their weapon and harder to hit....etc.  You are more vulnerable to a round kick (possibly) commonly found in the MT ring, but less vulnerable to a groin kick (possibly) more commonly found on the street.  Also, if you look at the "Tao" again you will see that he advocates a more squared stance in the clinch.

As far as parries.  I spent a few years in Wing Chun.  Boxing does not have the monopoly on good hand defense.  WC style hand defenses work, and so do Boxing's...there is a time and a place for each.


----------



## achilles (Jun 5, 2005)

To put it perhaps too simply, JKD tools are best performed out of the bai jong.  Your lead has better access to the target, your rear hand is closer to defend and the leg position allows for better explosive footwork.  The Thai stance is not ideal for JKD tools.

KyleShort, where did you find any reference to clinching in the Tao of Jeet Kune Do?  I don't remember anything about stance in clinch let alone any mention of clinching.


----------



## Flatlander (Sep 9, 2005)

achilles said:
			
		

> the leg position allows for better explosive footwork.


This was the first thing that came to my mind as well.  The bai jong allows for very quick footwork, and allows one to be highly mobile.  Much more control over closing the gap.  



> but is that the only reason why he chooses to make his more powerful rear hand weapons much slower.


Usually, JKDers take on a strong side lead.  This allows for their power weapon to be up front where the action is.  If you understand the principle behind the lead jab thrust, and can do it well, you'd find that this is a far more effective tool than a power cross.  One of the other reasons might be that, with more control in the front (due to strength and better command of the strong hand), tight redirects flowing into locking and breaking is much easier and more effective.  In that way, its reflective of JKDs focus on interception, yes. 



> KyleShort, where did you find any reference to clinching in the Tao of Jeet Kune Do? I don't remember anything about stance in clinch let alone any mention of clinching.


Nor do I, but it must be somewhere, because I too square off in the clinch.


----------

