# What does "your" JKD look like?



## cfr (Feb 7, 2006)

From reading on the web and talking to a few folks, it would appear one could find JKD looking rather different from place to place. That being said Im curious what your's looks like? Where I train it would look like:

1. Strong side forward.
2. Lot's of drills on stop hits/ kicks.
3. Lots of pad work/ boxing drills.
4. Some BJJ recently.
5. Very little trapping or take downs.
6. No weapons.

My instructor used to be much more into trapping and got away from it. He wants to utilize less techs, but hit very hard on those that we do use. So, how is it where you train?


----------



## kroh (Feb 7, 2006)

My JKD looks like crap right now because i am in bed drowning in multiple perscription drugs (where's the damn KLEENEX!)

When I was actively practicing it it was:
*Warm ups with purpose (shadow drills, striking kicking warmups).
*Technical series (designed to teach you what to do)
*Technical progression (taking the technical series and advancing them so that you learn to apply them in new and exciting ways)
*Play time ( this is that part of the class where everyone puts on the smallest gloves they could find and deludes themselves into being safe while systematically trying to take the other guy's head off).

Weapons in the class were usually seen later in the skill progression as the instructor wanted people to concentrate on the core cirriculum.  

If anyone happens to land in Rhode Island and needs a good JKD place to call home... http://derderian-academy.com 

Regards, 
Walt...aka sniffles


----------



## arnisador (Feb 7, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> 1. Strong side forward.
> 2. Lot's of drills on stop hits/ kicks.


 
Yes to #1, but my main JKD instructor doesn't emphasize stop hits as much (though of course we do do them). I'm currently away from home for work and training with another JFGF/JKD instructor who puts a moderate amount of emphasis on them.



> 3. Lots of pad work/ boxing drills.
> 4. Some BJJ recently.


 
Yes on #3, but at both places where I take JKD there is a separate BJJ or grappling class. So, at my main instructor's school, most everyone studies both JKD and BJJ, which is encouraged, but the BJJ is not technically done during the JKD class. During BJJ he will sometimes mix them together to illustrate how they fit.



> 5. Very little trapping or take downs.
> 6. No weapons.


 
We do a lot of trapping at both places where I take JKD. At the main school we do some wrestling-style takedowns, and at the other some jujutsu-style takedowns. As to weapons, both schools do a lot with stick and knife, though where I'm visiting it's also a separate class that one is encouraged to take alongside JKD, so we don't do it actually in the JKD segment as often as we would otherwise.

See also this thread.


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 8, 2006)

> 1. Strong side forward.
> 2. Lot's of drills on stop hits/ kicks.
> 3. Lots of pad work/ boxing drills.
> 4. Some BJJ recently.
> ...


1.We do the strong side forward to begin with, but as time moves on, we work in the weak side forward as well, to encourage ambidexterity.  

2.Our drilling is more focused on energy drills, developing contact awareness, and intercepting.

3. Yes, pad work, boxing drills, evasiveness.  

4.  Grappling has been a part of the program from the beginning.  Not limited to BJJ, but yes, working on the ground, incorporating weapons, stick grappling, standing grappling, lock flows, joint manipulation, body manipulation, throwing, destructions.

5.  Again, trapping has been a fundamental part of the curriculum, relating it to intercepting, destructions, locking, throwing, knife and stick work.

6. Lots of weapon work.  Batons on the first day. Mainly FMA canes, knives and later, sibat.

I think the main difference here is that my JKD is blended with Modern Arnis at the core, and the 2 seem to complement each other nicely.   That's about how it looks.


----------



## kroh (Feb 8, 2006)

Flatlander said:
			
		

> I think the main difference here is that my JKD is blended with Modern Arnis at the core, and the 2 seem to complement each other nicely. That's about how it looks.


 
That sounds like a lot of fun!  JKD Sibat training sounds fun...can you jik chung chuie with a six foot pole ? ;-)

Regards, 
Walt


----------



## Dancing Dragon (Feb 9, 2006)

Well, my "style" of JKD is heavily personalized to suit my fighting abilities. Me, being a believer in Bruce Lee's teachings, I made my own modifications to his JKD:

1. I make use of my long legs to execute fast and fancy kicks taken from Karate, Savate, and Muay Thai.
2. Narrower On-Guard stance to allow more speed and mobility.
3. Very fast execution and recovery of kicks.
4. Emphasis on smooth evasion, footwork, and deceptive feints.
5. Punches are used to 'set up' for the more powerful kicks.
6. South paw (strong side forward) of course.
7. No real trapping or hand immobilization, but plenty of slipping, and parrying.
8. Knowledge of the ranges of fighting, also make a point to maintain kicking range.
9. Concentration on flexibility, speed, and agility exercises.
10. Stop-hit and Stop-kick are strongly emphasized.

This is a variation of JKD with an emphasis on stylish kicks. Strongly rooted in Savate, special attention is paid to develop elegant movement and leg flexibility. The rationale is that the leg is the longest and strongest weapon a martial artist has, and kicks thus have the greatest potential to strike without retaliation. Now it's obvious that not everyone can practice this particular method of fighting, but it works great for me and that's what matters. I tried Bruce Lee's method and it just didn't work because my arms are too long and most of my opponents are shorter than me. Bruce even said himself:

"_Of my art--gung fu and jeet kune do--only one of 10,000 can handle it. It is martial art. Complete offensive attacks. It is silly to think that almost anyone can learn it. It isn't really contemporary forms of the art I teach. Mainly that which I work with--martial attack. It is really a smooth rhythmic expression of smashing the guy before he hits you, with any method available." -_page 59 of *Jeet Kune Do*_ Bruce Lee's Commentaries on the Martial Way._


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 9, 2006)

kroh said:
			
		

> can you jik chung chuie with a six foot pole ? ;-)


Yes, but I'd need to break it into 2-3'ers...


----------



## bladenosh (Mar 20, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> From reading on the web and talking to a few folks, it would appear one could find JKD looking rather different from place to place. That being said Im curious what your's looks like? Where I train it would look like:
> 
> 1. Strong side forward.
> 2. Lot's of drills on stop hits/ kicks.
> ...


 

I am not too educated on specific Jeet Kune Do. Although, I remember hearing a quote from Bruce Lee stating Jeet Kune Do is a dynamic fighting style for your body type. You create what works naturally and flows for you. While not being trained in Jeet Kune Do, I used this as a model to develope strategies that compliment my body's advantages.
I am 6'2" and 160-170lb. My advantages, are sharp precise elbows, long femur, double jointed hips, long arms, and a strong grip. My right arm is my strong hand, with enough knockout power in a jab, so I stand goofy with my right in front. My left hand is decently strong, but has an great power punch and leg blocks. My main disadvantage is an not so flexible hamstring, consequently few of my kicks remain powerful above chest level and a roundhouse is out of the question.
I dabbled in Kenpo (mainly for ranged standup), Karate and Muy Thai (for clenches), and Jui Jitsu (Superior to wrestling simply because of the comfort of the back and emphasis on flexibility).
I'm always working for improvement in all areas of fighting. My main focus is being well rounded, and initially skipping what seems to be benign. Being well rounded, I can see someones body structure and attempt to use mine as an advantage. If someone is stout and muscular, range is my friend. If someone works his kicks, and out boxes me then I'll go closer in range and focus on elbow and knee work. Jui Jitsu is a last minute resort if I do end up on my back, although it remains my favorite and most important; it is seldomly needed.


----------



## kroh (Mar 20, 2006)

> I am not too educated on specific Jeet Kune Do. Although, I remember hearing a quote from Bruce Lee stating Jeet Kune Do is a dynamic fighting style for your body type. You create what works naturally and flows for you. While not being trained in Jeet Kune Do, I used this as a model to develope strategies that compliment my body's advantages.


 
A good analogy to remember is that Jeet Kune Do can be compared to a car.  There are many different types of cars, but they all have four wheels, a passanger compartment, and an engine.  If they lack this basic structure then it is not a car.  While many people have come up with fantastic cross training regimens that teach well rounded combat skills... if it does not have the basic elements of Jeet Kune Do...then it isn't JKD.  Period.  It is your own personal fighting style... Which by the way sounds like a lot of fun.  Who do you train with currently to mix all those things together (kempo, Muy Thai, and Jiu-Jitsu)?

Regards, 
Walt


----------



## bladenosh (Mar 20, 2006)

kroh said:
			
		

> A good analogy to remember is that Jeet Kune Do can be compared to a car. There are many different types of cars, but they all have four wheels, a passanger compartment, and an engine. If they lack this basic structure then it is not a car. While many people have come up with fantastic cross training regimens that teach well rounded combat skills... if it does not have the basic elements of Jeet Kune Do...then it isn't JKD. Period. It is your own personal fighting style... Which by the way sounds like a lot of fun. Who do you train with currently to mix all those things together (kempo, Muy Thai, and Jiu-Jitsu)?
> 
> Regards,
> Walt


 
Thank you for clearing that up for me. I never actually classified it as Jeet Kune Do, because of my lack of information, but I knew it was similar. 

My first training for the logic of fighting came with my first game of chess at 5 years old which caught my interest into strategy and thinking under multiple persectives. 
The beginning of my actual martial arts training dates back to my first conscience fight. We all fight in the early years of school, but I never concentrated until a perspective change in an 8th grade fight when I first actually even cared if I won. He was a big kid, more fat than strong, but intimidating to me none the less. I strategized as with chess, and anticipated long before the fight, what he would do. Because of his body type and lack of knowledge of the fight, I assumed it would be an immediate tackle, his body in torpedo position. Most importantly, I knew he would attack first, attempting to overwhelm me. As amateur and unexperienced as I was at the time, my assumption was correct, and the fight basically ended with an immediate knee to his face as he was just going to make contact with me followed by an instinctive hammerfist to his kidney region. I was taken down, of course, and he was on top, but beyond disoriented, so I easily flipped him over, put him into the only submission I knew at the time which was a full nelson and he cried. At that moment, I realized I won off my animal instinct and acquired logic. Opening my eyes to the thrill of fighting compared to chess (fighting is just like a fast paced physical chess game). So I began my research of different styles complimenting my body style, with the help of other friends. Of course some had experience in boxing and wrestling, but none in martial arts. Fortunately, my dad is a black belt in Karate, so he helped me along a bit.
My training consisted of studying what people do, when I do a certain move, while fighting. So maining it was studying videos, working with a peer partner on the legitamacy in real life situations and to test what instinctive defenses the victim would have. Mainly to move it along. I saw strengths in those certain fighting styles. Kenpo has great defense to attack techniques and is quite easy to learn to a certain level not to mention knockout power from awkward angles (keep in mind, I am absolutely no blackbelt in any of these arts.) for my standup, muy thai and karate intrigued me because of the use of unconventional striking at a range most people arent used to, and jui jitsi was acquired by sparing with wrestlers. I realized wrestlers have no submission from the ground, but jui jitsu is deadly from all positions.
I trained mainly from sparring and testing would I assumed I could and could not do. I havent had the oppurtunity to be graced with someone who could specifically train these, but I do have plenty of friends willing to spar and a sponge of a brain. I have a friend who is a amateur champion muy thai fighter, father trained in jui jitsu and extensively in karate, and the kenpo was trained solo but has remained effective in many situations for me.


----------



## bladenosh (Mar 20, 2006)

bladenosh said:
			
		

> Thank you for clearing that up for me. I never actually classified it as Jeet Kune Do, because of my lack of information, but I knew it was similar.
> 
> My first training for the logic of fighting came with my first game of chess at 5 years old which caught my interest into strategy and thinking under multiple persectives.
> The beginning of my actual martial arts training dates back to my first conscience fight. We all fight in the early years of school, but I never concentrated until a perspective change in an 8th grade fight when I first actually even cared if I won. He was a big kid, more fat than strong, but intimidating to me none the less. I strategized as with chess, and anticipated long before the fight, what he would do. Because of his body type and lack of knowledge of the fight, I assumed it would be an immediate tackle, his body in torpedo position. Most importantly, I knew he would attack first, attempting to overwhelm me. As amateur and unexperienced as I was at the time, my assumption was correct, and the fight basically ended with an immediate knee to his face as he was just going to make contact with me followed by an instinctive hammerfist to his kidney region. I was taken down, of course, and he was on top, but beyond disoriented, so I easily flipped him over, put him into the only submission I knew at the time which was a full nelson and he cried. At that moment, I realized I won off my animal instinct and acquired logic. Opening my eyes to the thrill of fighting compared to chess (fighting is just like a fast paced physical chess game). So I began my research of different styles complimenting my body style, with the help of other friends. Of course some had experience in boxing and wrestling, but none in martial arts. Fortunately, my dad is a black belt in Karate, so he helped me along a bit.
> ...


 
"Kenpo has great defense to attack techniques and is quite easy to learn to a certain level not to mention knockout power from awkward angles (keep in mind, I am absolutely no blackbelt in any of these arts.) "


Should be "Kenpo has great defense to attack techniques and is quite easy to learn to a certain level(keep in mind, I am absolutely no blackbelt in any of these arts.),not to mention knockout power from awkward angles!


----------



## Flatlander (Mar 22, 2006)

Also, my JKD generally doesn't have any kicking higher than the solar plexus.  I have found that the higher kicking requires a whole lot of maintanance to keep up, and with the little time I have these days for training, I'm better off spending my time on other stuff.  Besides, under most circumstances, high kicking violates the principle of nearest weapon to closest target.  Or so I tell myself....


----------



## MA-Caver (Mar 22, 2006)

Flatlander said:
			
		

> Also, my JKD generally doesn't have any kicking higher than the solar plexus.  I have found that the higher kicking requires a whole lot of maintanance to keep up, and with the little time I have these days for training, I'm better off spending my time on other stuff.  Besides, under most circumstances, high kicking violates the principle of nearest weapon to closest target.  Or so I tell myself....



Same here... the things that I *used *to do compared to the things that I'm able to do now... sheesh... getting old sucks. At least I still got my speed. ... somewhat.


----------



## kroh (Mar 22, 2006)

MA-Caver said:
			
		

> Same here... the things that I *used *to do compared to the things that I'm able to do now... sheesh... getting old sucks. At least I still got my speed. ... somewhat.


 
Let the kids have all the speed and what not...I like being old and sneaky...

Regards,
Walt


----------



## MA-Caver (Mar 22, 2006)

kroh said:
			
		

> Let the kids have all the speed and what not...I like being old and sneaky...
> 
> Regards,
> Walt


Like eating beans and cabbages all the time?


----------



## kroh (Mar 23, 2006)

Beans and cabbage...I don't think me eating something like that and going to class would be in anyones benefit.

Regards, 
Walt


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 24, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> From reading on the web and talking to a few folks, it would appear one could find JKD looking rather different from place to place. That being said Im curious what your's looks like? Where I train it would look like:
> 
> 1. Strong side forward.
> 2. Lot's of drills on stop hits/ kicks.
> ...


 
1) Of course but both sides are trained.

2) Yes, but most drills are focused on "all" of the 5 ways of attack either singularly and some in combination.

3) Of course.

4) Yes but I've trained BJJ all along since I began JKD.

5) NO. Less usage of trapping would mean not practicing enough HIA. Besides I was training heavily in "intercepting/trapping." And I work the clinch quite a bit where intercepting/trapping leads to clinch which leads to either Trad. Ju Jitsu locks and holds or take downs which lead the BJJ.

6) No. Every martial art and artist should have at 1 or more "practical" weapons. The two I prefer are a 22" Serrada cane and a short , sharp knife.


----------



## cfr (Mar 24, 2006)

akja said:
			
		

> 5) NO. Less usage of trapping would mean not practicing enough HIA. Besides I was training heavily in "intercepting/trapping." And I work the clinch quite a bit where intercepting/trapping leads to clinch which leads to either Trad. Ju Jitsu locks and holds or take downs which lead the BJJ.
> 
> 6) No. Every martial art and artist should have at 1 or more "practical" weapons. The two I prefer are a 22" Serrada cane and a short , sharp knife.


 
Whats HIA? You are right about number 6. The two I prefer are my .38 and my baseball bat.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 24, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> Whats HIA? You are right about number 6. The two I prefer are my .38 and my baseball bat.


5 ways of attack. Hand Immobilization Attack (trapping).


----------



## cfr (Mar 24, 2006)

akja said:
			
		

> 5) NO. Less usage of trapping would mean not practicing enough HIA. Besides I was training heavily in "intercepting/trapping." And I work the clinch quite a bit where intercepting/trapping leads to clinch which leads to either Trad. Ju Jitsu locks and holds or take downs which lead the BJJ.


 
Sorry I didnt ask this all at once. What do you think is "enough" trapping? While we do work a lot on interception (stop hit\ kick) we dont do much actual trapping in the typical sense of the word.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 24, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> Sorry I didnt ask this all at once. What do you think is "enough" trapping? While we do work a lot on interception (stop hit\ kick) we dont do much actual trapping in the typical sense of the word.


 
I think that best asnswer for the word "enough" in relation to trapping where we as JKD'ers are with our own arts. My JKD is Oakland School evolved to today. Heavy James Lee Gung Fu. So trapping is a "root." 

If you intercept the next step (without thinking, just doing) is to a) strike or b) trap.  Trapping leads to the other transitional ranges as well as strikes, locks, takedowns etc etc


----------



## Flatlander (Mar 24, 2006)

"Enough" trapping is hard to define.  Perhaps it's sufficient to say: enough drilling of trapping principles until your use of trapping becomes second nature.  I don't think about trapping anymore, I just do it.  

Which isn't to say this should be the end of it.  Trapping drills are fun, and any trapping drill is useful in terms of developing your sensitivity and reflexes.  So, I guess there's never actually "enough" trapping - just one more tool in the box, that needs to be worked regularly.


----------



## DeLamar.J (Mar 25, 2006)

1. Basic boxing
2. Go for the balls, eyes, neck, and bite when ever possible.
3. Go in with full confidence giving everything you have right off the bat, if you gas out, then you should have trained harder. That makes for a fast and furious fight with no bull****.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 26, 2006)

Trapping also works on the ground and someone who is not familar with trapping but practices BJJ could be trapping without even knowing it. 

The "intercetion" is the tricky part and is the part most likely leading the naysayers into syaing trapping dosen't work. They usually mistake the interception for being trapping. The interception "can" be a part of the trap but we can intercept and eyejab or punch or lock, that would not be trapping. And we can trap without intercepting like in the case of groundgrappling or even a clich and we immobilze an arm.

Intercepting works and trapping works. Both need practice but interecpting is more difficult especially if one tends to fight outside.


----------



## Robert Lee (Apr 10, 2006)

While trapping is part of the training. You have to remember  its a  hitting product. You trap to remove  so you can hit. On the ground you could trap to stop and reset the motion. But traps should never be done just for trapping  So you grow to use them less as you learn better application. But keep them trained for when you may use them. Its been said many times hit hit trap and hit some more.  No different with parrying If you can hit or slip and hit no parry needed. But its there if you have to But waste time useing it you get hit Trapping is fun to train then in live action you adapt it to your use


----------



## Aruden (Apr 11, 2006)

Hi all, I'm new to this forum. I'm pleased to see there's an actual forum here,though many JKD/MMA forums have closen. Well this should be in the intro forum but i wanted to give my 2 cents about this thread.

As said Robert Lee IMO trapping should be used only when it's here and you shouldn't try to reach for it in a fight. I keep my traps very simple, mostly Pak Da and Lap Da.Once the limbs are trapped there are some very destructive tools that can be used very effectively: head, knee and elbow.

To answer the question my"JKD" or whatever I call it looks like that:

-I train both sides
-Being very tall and thin my grappling skills are low so i should train more in it, but my "style" is basically a striking style.
- "streetfighting" style, mainly influenced by Paul Vunak, i've trained in muay thai and i love the knees and particularly the elbows. This can include biting too.
-I've trained in Savate for a long time (being french and living in Paris a savate school is easy to find) i love leg techniques, though in a serious sparring match, kicks don't go over the waist.
-weapons: kali sticks,knife,staff and for fun the nunchucks :-D

Now for the finishing part i've been thinking of this: are destructions a form of interception...always?


----------



## Flatlander (Apr 11, 2006)

Welcome to Martial Talk, Aruden!  



> Now for the finishing part i've been thinking of this: are destructions a form of interception...always?


Interesting question.  When would you think that a destruction would not be an interception?


----------



## Aruden (Apr 11, 2006)

Thanks FlatLander!!

Well, i thought of this: A JKD'er ultimate goal is to intercept etc..., but nowadays Kali becomes a lot involved in the JKD world. I realised why Bruce Lee didn't want to give a name to this concept or whatever you call it. By calling it JKD, one may thinkg that in a fight the JKD praciticioner will try to intercept all his blows as his ultimate goal. However there are many other ways to defeat an opponent: angulating and hitting, parying and hitting etc... and destructions. Destructions may be a form of destruction: the gunting of the biceps when he punches, similar concept as the side stop kick, or the elbow tip to knuckle destruction.However some destruction are just blocks but meant to hurt, like the tip of the knee against a low roundhouse (don't know the acutal name of the technique) or the cover-like destruction but in fact delivering a vertical elbow to chest-destruction. These are not directly interception though they distract the opponent.Is it considered as an attack or as an interception.
I know this may seems silly, it's just words, but for the true meaning of JKD what are destructions?


----------



## green meanie (Apr 11, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> 1. Strong side forward.
> 2. Lot's of drills on stop hits/ kicks.
> 3. Lots of pad work/ boxing drills.
> 4. Some BJJ recently.
> ...


 
1. We train 'comforable' side forward. Which ever side 'feels' right is right. But that's just to get started. As time goes on we train both sides.
2. No. Little to no time is spent on this.
3. Yes. Lots of pad work / boxing & kenpo drills.
4. We do a lot of groundwork. Both in and out of the gi.
5. Very little trapping, lots of takedowns.
6. We have weapons but it's optional and comes in later in the training.


----------



## Marvin (Apr 22, 2006)

Western boxing lead with CM structure. Working stand up, clinch, ground, and stick work. Lots of drills, a little sparring most classes.


----------



## Calm Intention (May 20, 2006)

I hope I'm not out of line here,  but:

'should J.K.D.  look like anything'?

I real think Master Lee would agree with that statement.


----------



## cfr (May 21, 2006)

Well, if you do JKD, what does it look like? Is it full of high flashy kicks? Lots of trapping? Lots of stop kicks/ hits? Do you do cartwheels and try to kick people that way? It looks like something.


----------



## Calm Intention (May 21, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> Well, if you do JKD, what does it look like? Is it full of high flashy kicks? Lots of trapping? Lots of stop kicks/ hits? Do you do cartwheels and try to kick people that way? It looks like something.


:

I respectfully disagree on 'it looks like something'.... I don't think its supposed to look like anything- Bruce did not want to be defined, along with what he was attempting to convey.


----------



## kroh (May 21, 2006)

If you were to do a search and read earlier in the thread... JKD as Lee taught it had a certain structure with open ended cirriculum so that each person could express it in there own way later on.  Some basic tennents include:

* Strong Side Forward
* Boxing style attacks based on Wing Chun Structure
* Wing Chun attack theory for a majority of conflict resolution
* Western fencing style footwork
* Simplification of the fighting method so that complicated fighting formulae are not the end result but are the means to the end.  You don't trap because that is how it is done, you trap so that you can remove a barrier to hitting some in the skull.
* Keeping an open mind to how other methods of fighting can enhance your own.  Jeet Kune Do is not a stew recipe for fighting.  It is a simplified method of fighting based on Wing Chun, Western Boxing, and Fencing while understanding that other methods my have something you are missing.  

Those that put a hodge podge together and call it JKD are not practicing JKD.  You can say it all you want but it isn't true.  If you were a duck claiming to be an eagle...the other ducks might buy it but the eagles would tear you apart after laughing hystericaly at you.  Let the frauds and want to be's and Bruce Groupies claim what they want, it still doesn't make them into something that their not.  Besides JKD I also train in certain forms of asian swordsmanship.  I have seen threads on here of dim witted teens grabbing a live blade (because their parents should have their heads examined) and saying that they are teaching themselves swordsmanship.  ....Ah huh... If they want to believe that then i will let Darwin invigorate the gene pool by thining the heard.  

JKD does has a structure and it is not totally formless...as with a lot of religious extremists, people often take things out of context and make it say anything they want to (often times to suit their own purpose).  

Also see here with a great post by AC Pilot and article by Dan Inosanto:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21435

Regards,
Walt


----------



## cfr (May 21, 2006)

Calm Intention said:
			
		

> :
> 
> I respectfully disagree on 'it looks like something'.... I don't think its supposed to look like anything- Bruce did not want to be defined, along with what he was attempting to convey.


 
And respectful disagreements are a fair thing. But keep in mind, I wasnt asking for it to be defined. I asked what it looked like. I stated what it looks like when I do it. Someone else said when he does it, it has lots of kicks. Someone else said when he does it theres a good amount of trapping. So while it may not look like anything when you do it, for others it looks like a heavy boxing emphasis, lots of kicking, lots of trapping, etc.


----------



## Calm Intention (May 21, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> Well, if you do JKD, what does it look like? Is it full of high flashy kicks? Lots of trapping? Lots of stop kicks/ hits? Do you do cartwheels and try to kick people that way? It looks like something.


 
I apologize,  but I still think you're slapping an M.O. on yourselves when you ask that question,  and in my interpretation(and I may be wrong),  this is the anti-thesis of Bruce's concern about not to be blocked in by the static nature of a specific arts techniques(being defined)-- or, as 'what does your J.K.D. look like'.
This reminds of quantum physics 'wave vs. particle'.   I think we should remain as the Wave(universal and infinite....un-defined),,  un-available and intangible for your enemy/opponent to figure out.

Somehow,  I feel the thread-starter was testing us with this question.

*If anyone here really knows Master Lee's philosophy, I'd respect their opinion.


----------



## cfr (May 21, 2006)

Calm Intention said:
			
		

> I apologize, but I still think you're slapping an M.O. on yourselves when you ask that question, and in my interpretation(and I may be wrong), this is the anti-thesis of Bruce's concern about not to be blocked in by the static nature of a specific arts techniques(being defined)-- or, as 'what does your J.K.D. look like'.
> This reminds of quantum physics 'wave vs. particle'. I think we should remain as the Wave(universal and infinite....un-defined),, un-available and intangible for your enemy/opponent to figure out.
> 
> Somehow, I feel the thread-starter was testing us with this question.
> ...


 
I have no idea what an M.O. is? Also, Im just not a very deep person. In fact, I've purposely not read a whole lots about Bruce's philosophies because I really dont want to get caught up in "what he really meant" or all the other B.S. that occurs on these forums in regards to Bruce and JKD. After all, "ignorance is bliss". As far as testing goes, Im certainly no authority on the matter, and by no means qualified to test anyone. Just a guy who suddenly realized that JKD can "look" different from one school to another, and curious about what other peoples JKD "looks" like. Some people may look very deeply into the question and think thats a bad way to view JKD, but Ive posted this question both here and on another forum and lots of other folks dont see a problem with it. I guess were all just missing the bigger picture, which is fine with me. After all, my signature pretty much decsribes my attitude about stuff like this.


----------



## Flatlander (May 22, 2006)

Calm Intention said:
			
		

> This reminds of quantum physics 'wave vs. particle'. I think we should remain as the Wave(universal and infinite....un-defined)


A wave is absolutely definable.  Wavelength, frequency, amplitude, direction of propagation.....

Recall the concept of 'take what is useful'?  Perhaps not all see the same ways of moving as being useful.  Given that, it stands to reason that we've begun to define by elimination, much like a block of stone becomes a statue.  Not all statues look the same, and are in fact, quite definable.

Now, I do understand where you're going with this.  I think that's why you're not seeing many answers such as "I always do X when Y happens."  Of course there ought not be predictability.  However, though I may not know what the Chef has on the menu, I can tell you that he tends to use a lot of garlic....


----------



## Calm Intention (May 22, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> I have no idea what an M.O. is? Also, Im just not a very deep person. In fact, I've purposely not read a whole lots about Bruce's philosophies because I really dont want to get caught up in "what he really meant" or all the other B.S. that occurs on these forums in regards to Bruce and JKD. After all, "ignorance is bliss". As far as testing goes, Im certainly no authority on the matter, and by no means qualified to test anyone. Just a guy who suddenly realized that JKD can "look" different from one school to another, and curious about what other peoples JKD "looks" like. Some people may look very deeply into the question and think thats a bad way to view JKD, but Ive posted this question both here and on another forum and lots of other folks dont see a problem with it. I guess were all just missing the bigger picture, which is fine with me. After all, my signature pretty much decsribes my attitude about stuff like this.


 
By an M.O., I'm speaking 'modus operandi'.
I'll just say that Bruce was about being 'fluid',  and not just in his physical movement....but his conceptual discipline- 'no way as way'.

I'm sorry,  but the question of the thread starter conflicts with my impressions of what I think JKD is about(but then,  I may be totally wrong- I will allow that).
I'd also say that it is commendable on how so many people debate 'what Bruce meant',,, I think it shows our respect for him,  his unique philosophy,  and our desire to try and defend his legacy.


----------



## Calm Intention (May 22, 2006)

Flatlander said:
			
		

> A wave is absolutely definable. Wavelength, frequency, amplitude, direction of propagation.....
> 
> Recall the concept of 'take what is useful'? Perhaps not all see the same ways of moving as being useful. Given that, it stands to reason that we've begun to define by elimination, much like a block of stone becomes a statue. Not all statues look the same, and are in fact, quite definable.
> 
> Now, I do understand where you're going with this. I think that's why you're not seeing many answers such as "I always do X when Y happens." Of course there ought not be predictability. However, though I may not know what the Chef has on the menu, I can tell you that he tends to use a lot of garlic....


 
Hi Flatlander,

I only know the very basics of the quantum stuff(S.R. and U.F.T.,  are side hobbies of interest for me).
Still,  'collapse the wave function'  by the Observor,  results in something quite specific as opposed to a wave.  Possibly I didn't use the best analogy.
I'm pretty new here,  and have already engaged two threads regarding JKD's developement,  meaning,  bastardization, etc.
I'll just say kudo's to Bruce for stimulating alot of good thinking,  by having 
created a philosophy that functions as a martial art too-  I don't think any of the other M.A.'s can meet this level of purity(though Aikido is based in a strong philosophy too).

I understand what your saying with the analogy to the Chef.
With that in mind,  would Bruce let you see the menu?


----------



## monkey (May 22, 2006)

Jeet kunu Do the way of the intercepting fist-1) single angle attack 2) attack by draw 3 )attack by combo 4 )attack by Idirect then progress added (1965 to ways) 5 ) progresive indirect attack 6) hand imoblise attack.These were set to break of the static ways of karate-judo-aikido-wing chun-ect.Having heavy enfluance in Epie to have lead forward & head to to attacks.Boxing gave it the 5 attacks of hook-jab-cross-back fist & upper cut.Now as Bruce said we can not puch or kick japanese or chinese or korean.We do have the same arms & legs & we all punch & kick the same (round line -curve line-straight line) but how we get there is up to us & how we use our bodies to the max & espress our own ways is very hard to do.To do forms & katas & take on ways of theachers is not exspressing your self.This is very hard to do so Unless we grow 2 more arms & legs there realy isnts a differant punching style.This is what jkd looks like.


----------



## cfr (May 22, 2006)

Calm Intention said:
			
		

> By an M.O., I'm speaking 'modus operandi'.
> I'll just say that Bruce was about being 'fluid', and not just in his physical movement....but his conceptual discipline- 'no way as way'.
> 
> I'm sorry, but the question of the thread starter conflicts with my impressions of what I think JKD is about(but then, I may be totally wrong- I will allow that).
> I'd also say that it is commendable on how so many people debate 'what Bruce meant',,, I think it shows our respect for him, his unique philosophy, and our desire to try and defend his legacy.


 
Commendable? Do you really think someone as wise as he is (from what I've heard) would want people debating what he meant decades ago? Do you really think he'd want you wasting your time hammering on the keyboard when you could be spending time with your family, reading philosophy, training, etc? Is this really what he intended? Hell, Im at work right now and should be doing what Im paid for, but do you see my point?


----------



## Flatlander (May 22, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> Commendable? Do you really think someone as wise as he is (from what I've heard) would want people debating what he meant decades ago? Do you really think he'd want you wasting your time hammering on the keyboard when you could be spending time with your family, reading philosophy, training, etc? Is this really what he intended? Hell, Im at work right now and should be doing what Im paid for, but do you see my point?


In all fairness, discussion boards are made for discussion.  I see your point, but let's not forget why we're here. :asian:


----------



## monkey (May 22, 2006)

Bruce did have guides while we traind basic-sifu.Now the no way as way (ment- dont use kata or forms or emulate to fight but use you not a mirror image as it can shatter & reflect all motion)The be formless shapeless like water.Was (plyablity to the hard & hard to the soft attacks.)Water can be both.The statement use what is usefull & reject the useless ment( if you see a twist kick for example in tkd. & you can deploy it no telgraphic & scientific & siplistic then use it to the situation that arises.)This to other ment its a licence to go study all arts to fullest -get all ranks to fullest & charge moo koo bucks for you have concepts or progressive or other,But you will never have JKD.


----------



## Calm Intention (May 22, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> Commendable? Do you really think someone as wise as he is (from what I've heard) would want people debating what he meant decades ago? Do you really think he'd want you wasting your time hammering on the keyboard when you could be spending time with your family, reading philosophy, training, etc? Is this really what he intended? Hell, Im at work right now and should be doing what Im paid for, but do you see my point?


 
I did not say that Master Lee would have thought it commendable that we discuss this.   He might find it humorless,  or color-less,, but since he was known to have a large ego,  he might feel honored in one sense,  and he also might want to test your JKD for its effectiveness.

I do find it commendable that people respect the man and the philosophy to such a degree,  that we continue to show our honor by engaging what are obviously redundant debates.
Yes,  I could have immersed myself(on my day off),  on some politics discussion forums,  trying to solve an uncertain future for earths inhabitants,  but I needed a break.

Since I've never visited a martial art discussion forum ever,  and have long had an affinity toward Master Lee's philosophy(and knew someone at the Groton Submarine base years back who trained in Dallas with someone who might have been an original student- and this guy really knew his stuff, sensitivity exercises, etc),  I somehow felt it incumbent to chime in
due to my strict interpretation.
*I know where you guys are coming from(I see the distinction being made),  but I still maintain my initial comments.:asian:


----------



## lll000000lll (Aug 1, 2006)

* South Paw* (although i try to change it up after some combos)

*footwork* (mostly smooth evasiveness with some use of feints) as well as getting in a good position for attacks and counter attacks.

*broken rhythm attacks*

*BOB drills* just striking like boxing/kick boxing/muay thai

*sparring* just with training partners

not too much trapping or takedowns

very little BJJ


----------



## Thunder Foot (Aug 21, 2006)

cfr said:
			
		

> 1. Strong side forward.
> 2. Lot's of drills on stop hits/ kicks.
> 3. Lots of pad work/ boxing drills.
> 4. Some BJJ recently.
> ...


 
Well, I have 2 JKD instructors. I happen to live close enough to the Inosanto academy it commute and learn from time to time. But I also have a student of his whom owns a school in my city as well.

1. We practice strong side forward, however Guro Inosanto has often stated that the fighters of the future will be ambidextrious... so he heavily emphasis being equal on both sides rather than having a "strong side". So in short, we practice both.

2. yes, we have JKD/Kickboxing combinations at our academy that do incorporate stop hits. Drilling of the stop hits is typically incorpated in sparring.

3. Pad work with the Thai pads is heavily Muay Thai influenced. Pad work with the mits is more geared towards SAA, PIA, etc.

4. BJJ at our academy is often used as a transition from the trapping range withuse of takedowns... as Bruce believed in grappling as a means of finishing the opponent, as written in the Tao. From time to time we practice from the guard, mount, side-mount, etc... but not the same way as we do in BJJ.

5. Trapping is heavily influenced in our school. We do chi sao drills along with Mok Jong drills, depending on your level in the system. There are also trapping partner drills we go through as well, alongside trapping to takedown drills.

6. Weapons we often are doing Kali. Single stick, double stick, knife, etc. I don't really see this as being fundamental to JKD, but alot fo the Kali techniques can be applied empty handed as well... thus giving (atleast me) a better understanding of the techniques. 

All in all.... it really depends on what time of the year it is. We often have workshops where we may focus on Savate, Muay Thai.... or whatever, depending. :asian:


----------



## lll000000lll (Nov 16, 2006)

lately i've been really into progressive indirect attacks. and stop hits and stop kicks.

i really need to work on my chi sao drilling. any advice anyone???


----------



## Jimi (Nov 18, 2006)

My advice is to work with a partner as often as possible on Chi Sao, senitivity drills are important to keep up with. Without a partner my Chi Sao kinda goes to sleep until I start working with someone again. Keep association with your instructor to help if things get sloppy or you just need some coaching. I miss training with my instructor as often as I used to. Fook'em if they can't take a Jut. LOL. llllooollll, how are things going? You train at Rons place now or elsewhere? PEACE JIMI


----------

