Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Truth has path." Truth has no path,
So when does JKD simply evolve and look like MMA? Or will we always be able to tell what it is just by observation?
If you don't even know the only way, you can't even start to flow. You have to learn how to walk before you can run.The throw is a tool, not a doctrine.
The moment you treat it as the only way, you lose the ability to flow.
In order to have the ability to flow, you have to know everything and also to be good on everything. Does JKD have a plan to help you to get there (know everything and good on everything)?The moment you treat it as the only way, you lose the ability to flow.
In order to have the ability to flow, you have to know everything and also to be good on everything. Does JKD have a plan to help you to get there (know everything and good on everything)?
Everything means for each and every opportunity, you know how to take advantage on it.What is everything?
One only has to be better at what they do, then the other is at what they do.
Do we have anybody who train JKD in this forum? Can you share information such as:Donno, you should ask those who practice JKD.
Reading what is shared at the following link should help your understanding a little more:Do we have anybody who train JKD in this forum? Can you share information such as:
- What's the beginner level, intermediate level, advance level training programs for JKD?
- What are the tools in JKD's toolbox?
- What are the JKD "entering strategy" (I believe this can be the major difference between WC and JKD)?
- Are there any solo forms training at all?
- ...
JKD evolved from WC. Should there be more JKD practitioners than WC practitioners today?
To be honest, i tend to categorize JKD as you said, Original JKD" and "JKD Concepts. And i have trained a little (very little) of both.When I was training as a counselor/therapist, one of my supervisors defined theory as nothing more than a way of organizing your work. I often think of style the same way. I know there are a thousand quotes from Lee and his influences that we could post here about style. But setting all that aside for a bit...
When Lee was formulating then teaching JKD, it was a relatively small group. And he talked a lot about personalised training plans based on each individual's needs and strengths. So Dan Inosanto's program might have looked different from Ted Wong's, which looked different from Larry Hartsell's, etc.
Then comes the question of scalability. Once you go from a core group of... let's say 10 (picking that number from the aether)... to bigger classes, things generally get more systematised. Your work has to become more organised to be done at scale.
I would be sorely tempted to describe JKD as a style at this point. Or perhaps two styles. "Original JKD" and "JKD Concepts." There's still room for variation, but there's enough commonality and consistency to be recognisable as JKD.
My experience has been in JKD Concepts. And, honestly, I didn't put my focus in that Jun Fan (Wing Chun-derived) core, so I'm hesitant to describe myself as having studied JKD really. More Inosanto Blend kali and southeast Asian kickboxing. But that aside for a minute...
I was at the gym a couple of months ago at the university where I study. I'm an out-of-shape 53-year-old grad student, so I was making a pretty poor showing on the heavy bag, in my view. But it caught the attention of some young guy. He was perfectly cordial, but chose that moment to come and use the bags himself. We had to take turns, as another young person was busy making me look bad on the other one.
So this young guy is shadowboxing on the side while I'm doing my thing. And I could recognise what he was doing as savate (which he confirmed). Then he went into some basic trapping movements. Not from a wing chun stance. So he came from a JKD Concepts school. Readily recognisable as JKD Concepts because that's how that work is often organised. Not formless. But a common, repeated combination of influences easily detected by someone else with exposure to that system.
I'm confident that there are philosophical counterarguments people could/might make, but if you take style to mean something technically reproducible and recognisable, then I think the word works just fine.
I did a little Jun Fan myself. Very little really. Ironically, I found FMA through an interest in JKD. Then, when I finally found a JKD instructor, I focused on the FMA component of it to the exclusion of JKD. Fickle, I am.To be honest, i tend to categorize JKD as you said, Original JKD" and "JKD Concepts. And i have trained a little (very little) of both.
As to Jun Fan, i did a little, i tend to refer to it as Wing Chun on steroids
Trained only a little JKD, but am going back next month hopefullyI did a little Jun Fan myself. Very little really. Ironically, I found FMA through an interest in JKD. Then, when I finally found a JKD instructor, I focused on the FMA component of it to the exclusion of JKD. Fickle, I am.
I should say, though, that JKD Concepts schools and teachers tend to vary the ratios in their given approach. One teacher may emphasize silat where another focuses on BJJ or shootwrestling (I'm thinking of Erik Paulson as an example of the latter, though this has existed almost from Day 1 in JKD with Larry Hartsell and his focus on grappling over the more common emphasis on wing chun, boxing, and fencing.)
Regardless of how much of each cocktail ingredient there is, what Erik Paulson does is recognisably related to what Cass Magda does (as an example of a JKD teacher whose emphasis runs more to FMA and silat than grappling). There's enough stylistic overlap to relate them.