Jeet Kune Do and other Street Fighting Concepts

iancobb00 · September 17th, 2006, 12:00 AM

I've been meaning to ask this...
Does anyone on this site presently study JKD or some art focused on street fighting (Krav, Military, etc.)? I'd really like to get some voices in here; JKD is a wonderful study to look at simply because--as per Bruce's concept--there's no right or wrong way to do things.
So if anybody has some techniques they like to use with JKD concepts/ Street Fighting concepts, questions, answers, etc. , please share.

My contribution... JKD in MMA.
I once saw a fighter at the Madtown Throwdown--an MMA comp run by the guys I'm presently training with in Madison Wisconsin--who claimed to be a JKD fighter. However, when he stepped in, he had nothing to show for himself. (The fight ended with him getting caught with a semi-accidental can opener of all things; he had to be carried out on a stretcher!!!)
My former instructor studied JKD under a J. Miller(?), who trained under Paul Vunak. JKD is supposed to be the primary art taught at his school; nevertheless, he uses none of the concepts he teaches when he fights. (Luke Cumo is another example of a JKD fighter turned MMA competitor who falls under the same category.)
These items perplex me. Any thoughts?

iancobb00 · September 17th, 2006, 08:37 PM

...Hello?....anybody?
Was this just a stupid topic, or is there seriously no one interested? Come on guys, I really'd like some feedback...

Mr. D. · September 20th, 2006, 03:35 PM

Just as there are teachers who are better than other teachers, there are students who are better stundents than the others. These men may very well have studied JKD as they said, but they may have been poor students. Learning is a skill.
Some people like to lie about their accomplishments. That may account for one of these fighters you mentioned. Still, if you don't pay atention in class, don't practice properly and think you already know everything, the chances are you won't be a good student of whatever it is you're studying.
As far as I can tell JKD is a valid fighting art for Bruce Lee used it and was appearantly never beaten. This includes scheduled matches and impromptu fights. He had great natural ability, but he trained hours and hours every day. That's the key.

**chuckg** · September 21st, 2006, 08:44 AM

There are a lot of places that claim to teach JKD concepts but the only place I've ever seen around me that claims to teach true JKD is Princeton Academy of Martial Arts. Both owners studied under Dan Innosanto. They also teach Krav, as well as Savate and Tai boxing. I took JKD, or what i thought would be JKD (having read the Tao over and over again since I was 13 and trying to apply it's concepts to what I learned in Karate (Shotokan) and american boxing), and found it to be moreso Jun Fan (Bruce Lee's real name) Kung Fu. Basically nothing more than Wing Chun Kung Fu mixed with Chinese boxing. After everything I had read over the years of Bruce Lee's teachings and the Tao I felt cheated. It felt nothing more than a structured discipline that made you do things their way rather than from a personal perspective.

Imo, Dan Innosanto took what Bruce developed and made it into a marketable profit. Way to go.

jackcity · September 21st, 2006, 01:13 PM

jkd is just a huge contradiction. study MMA youll be much better off.

iancobb00 · September 21st, 2006, 06:08 PM

I don't agree with anything that has been said. First and foremost, Inosanto's JKD integrated Filipino Kali; this has caused a softer style of training. If you're not familiar with Kali, it's the major art from the Philipines and is the original art that spawned the softer Eskrima and Arnis styles. Kali utilizes the most lethal strikes and attacks seen on the planet... I kid you not!!!! Nasty neck breaks, destructions, etc. It differs from Wing Chun in its use of angling to strike: give up center line and you know exactly where the attack is coming from. Dan also advocates the use of MMA training; however, he's the first to tell you that he's not a great athlete like Bruce. In truth, Inosanto doesn't really like being considered the continuing link to Lee's concepts.

In regards to marketing, JKD has been spoiled. It has been so watered down in order to make it a business-compatible art that you learn nothing for years. True, affective JKD can be learned through Paul Vunak. If you don't know him, look him up. You can find some videos on Limewire, etc. What he teaches--and, more importantly, how he teaches--is the real deal.

Oh, and MMA isn't a street-worthy art; if you think so, you're a fool. The concepts taught in MMA aren't practical in such settings. Trying to take a guy down and pound his head in doesn't do much good if he's got friends or a knife! Go for an armbar while fighting on gravel and pavement; I dare you! Try to kick a guy while on an icy sidewalk. Try to out-punch four guys in a dark corner of some bar. We'll see how long you can last.

I train with UFC competitors and their associates. With only a short amount of MMA training--and a huge amount of natural talent (ouch...I just hurt my arm while patting myself on the back...won't be able to fit my head through the door...) I can just barely keep up with the blue and purple belts at my school. But put them in a street fight with me... I give them 10 seconds. MMA just doesn't work. I take that back. MMA "concepts" do not work. Many striking and defending techniques are applicable... rule out submission offense, though.

**TheManWhoCan** · September 24th, 2006, 01:08 AM

"....as per Bruce's concept--there's no right or wrong way to do things."

That's not a concept of Bruce's. The art doesn't stress random flailing as useful, and effective techniques. It's about "un-natural naturalness", or "natural un-naturalness". The techniques learned are very much conditioned, thus the un-naturalness. But they are conditioned so well, it feels natural.

Sorry if that sounded like a flame, it's really not meant to be.

"So if anybody has some techniques they like to use with JKD concepts/ Street Fighting concepts, questions, answers, etc. , please share."

When sparring in the grappling aspect of JKD, I like to lean towards Judo the most. That's just personal preference, but I find Judo seems to be extremely effective.

When sparring using striking techniques, I love using draws and feints to make the opponent "parry himself", then trap the arms when you're in close. I started doing this after I had it done to me. I bit the feint hook line and sinker, then got waxed with a quick combo.

"....and found it to be moreso Jun Fan (Bruce Lee's real name) Kung Fu. Basically nothing more than Wing Chun Kung Fu mixed with Chinese boxing. After everything I had read over the years of Bruce Lee's teachings and the Tao I felt cheated. It felt nothing more than a structured discipline that made you do things their way rather than from a personal perspective."

I would feel cheated to. Whoever you learned JKD from, doesn't seem to understand what's it about. Although, you could've eaily been training Jun Fan Jeet Kune Do, and the people who teach that teach JKD the way Bruce had taught it. It's not the same as JKD, it can't be.

"jkd is just a huge contradiction. study MMA youll be much better off."

Ya good call. Because we all know that JKD has nothing to do with mixing martial arts.

iancobb00 · September 24th, 2006, 08:00 PM

"...as per Bruce's concept--there's no right or wrong way to do things.

That's not a concept of Bruce's. The art doesn't stress random flailing as useful, and effective techniques. It's about "un-natural naturalness", or "natural un-naturalness". The techniques learned are very much conditioned, thus the un-naturalness. But they are conditioned so well, it feels natural."

-- For clarification: Bruce did stress the concept that there is no right or wrong way; what you are implying is the difference between diciplined response and clouded reaction. Bruce believed that no art was necessarily the "best", hence the term "concepts". JKD deals with practiced materials, not random flailing. That much is certainly true. But that wasn't the point I was making.

"When sparring in the grappling aspect of JKD, I like to lean towards Judo the most. That's just personal preference, but I find Judo seems to be extremely effective."

--I'm not too familiar with Judo--other than what I've seen and what might be integrated into my sub. wrestling training. Since Judo is a strong takedown art, and takedowns happen to be my weakest attribute, it would be something I'd very much like to try some day. I would say that Judo takedowns are the only street-wise takedowns; modern JKD utilizes a lot of ground defense, but we stress staying away from the ground. Judo, when modified to be more explosive in entry and less sport-oriented, allows you to plant and control your opponent without going to the ground. BJJ uses a lot of holding on tight and driving downward; wrestling uses a lot of explosive, high pressure td's.

"When sparring using striking techniques, I love using draws and feints to make the opponent "parry himself", then trap the arms when you're in close. I started doing this after I had it done to me. I bit the feint hook line and sinker, then got waxed with a quick combo."

--...interesting. Funny how this works for JKD even though it's an oxymoron to the Cantonese title. Rather than intercepting, you're using post-strike traps and allowing the opponent to enter trapping range on his own. Although I question the likeliness of most brawlers and strikers entering trapping range, grapplers are very likely to succumb to such strategy... way cool!

" 'jkd is just a huge contradiction. study MMA youll be much better off.'

Ya good call. Because we all know that JKD has nothing to do with mixing martial arts. "

--This is all wrong. JKD and Filipino concepts can be integrated into MMA. I do it all the time and it works. One would assume that most practitioners who blend in with the MMA world probably draw to large of a distinction between street and sport. I think that using destructions--nerve, not bone breaks--can end a fight very quickly. Take away the opponents tools; that makes more sense than constantly trying to outpower your opponent.

jackcity · September 25th, 2006, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheManWhoCan

"jkd is just a huge contradiction. study MMA youll be much better off."

Ya good call. Because we all know that JKD has nothing to do with mixing martial arts.

Yea, JKD does have to do with mixing martial arts. But put a "JKD" trained fighter up against a modern MMA fighter and the JKD will lose. Why would anyone go to a JKD school? If you read the book you would realize that it isnt something that can be taught at a school, rather something you must learn through yourself. You can study various martial arts like Bruce did, effectively becomming a standard MMA fighter, but JDK is simply a philosphy not an art form. This is Bruce's philosphy on how to most effectively harness all that you have learned by studying the various martial arts, or by simply searching within. And that is why it is silly to study the kind of JKD they teach at a JKD school.

**chuckg** · September 25th, 2006, 08:32 AM

:popcorn:

Wow, this is a really great debate! Everyone so far has had some really great ideas to share.

iancobb00 · September 25th, 2006, 09:04 PM

Okay, you've obviously been reading about JKD. But reading isn't doing. Lee's books didn't teach the concepts about JKD. He was much more interested in publishing his thoughts on the warrior; he talked about the philosophy of the martial artist. Modern JKD is composed of many of the techniques that he favored. Even more evolved training--again, see Paul Vunak--uses what is battle tested. I kid you not; the "modern masters", if you will, have some horror stories ranging from 16 on 4 bar fights to battle field combat.

**TheManWhoCan** · September 25th, 2006, 11:57 PM

"-- For clarification: Bruce did stress the concept that there is no right or wrong way; what you are implying is the difference between diciplined response and clouded reaction......."

That's what I thought you meant. I get worried that people read the Tao, and nothing else, and assume that "formless form" means random attacks with no control. That's how the JKD reputation becomes tarnished.

"I would say that Judo takedowns are the only street-wise takedowns; modern JKD utilizes a lot of ground defense, but we stress staying away from the ground....."

That's the same thing I've taught people to. If you can stay off the ground, stay off the ground. One thing I've found with Judo (I've not been training in it for long), is that in order to really see the effect of a technique, you have to let the guy go when you're throwing him. If you let him go, man does it hurt, even you break fall. I've not studied BJJ or much of wrestling, except the basics. What I'm trying to do is break down JKD into all it's different arts, study them, then improve my own JKD. So BJJ and wrestling are still to come.

Have you read the Art of War?

".... Rather than intercepting, you're using post-strike traps and allowing the opponent to enter trapping range on his own. Although I question the likeliness of most brawlers and strikers entering trapping range, grapplers are very likely to succumb to such strategy... way cool!"

That's exactally it. It's a little dangerous against other strikers or brawlers as oppose to grapplers, but that's ok for me. From studying Wing Chun, one of the most beneficial things I've learned is that you have to have confidence in your hands. So that no matter what attack comes, you can counter it. It was really bizare (and to some degree, still is) when I first started because in boxing, they teach you to "get all the way in, or be all the way out", so standing right in that danger zone when the guy can cream you is unnerving. But then I started realizing, if I'm standing where he can hit me, he's going to try and hit me. So the attacks are recognized a little earlier.

I'm big on counter attacks, so most things I do is a draw of some kind. Whether it's through drawing by attacks, or by feining an opening in my defense, I love countering.

"But put a "JKD" trained fighter up against a modern MMA fighter and the JKD will lose. Why would anyone go to a JKD school?"

Really. Other then you're own opinion, please tell me why exactally this would happen. I'd love to hear it.

"If you read the book you would realize that it isnt something that can be taught at a school, rather something you must learn through yourself. You can study various martial arts like Bruce did, effectively becomming a standard MMA fighter, but JDK is simply a philosphy not an art form."

If I read the book, man that's funny. There is nothing philisophical about punching as fast and as hard as you can, to the most vital area accessible. You've incorreclty labeled JKD strictly as a philosophy, which is due to ignorance on the subject. It is not just a philosphy. If it were, there would be zero techniques outlined. I understand completely what you're saying, but it is wrong. You cannot have all philosophy and no application, or all application and no philosophy. Do you understand what I'm saying? There is a correct way to punch, and that correct way can be taught to people. The use of that punch should not be conditioned so that you punch with the same time, same place, same speed, etc. etc. every single time. That is why JKD is not just a philosphy, and in my opinion, is the definition of martial arts.

And what's your definition of an art form then?

"This is Bruce's philosphy on how to most effectively harness all that you have learned by studying the various martial arts, or by simply searching within. And that is why it is silly to study the kind of JKD they teach at a JKD school."

Just because JKD can be very difficult to teach at a dojo, does not mean what they teach at that dojo, is invaluable. A good martial artist should seek wisdom, techniques, spiritual enlightenment etc from as many sources as possible. Keeping that which is valuable to the individual, and disregarding the rest. That is the essence of Jeet Kune Do.

**chuckg** · September 26th, 2006, 10:42 AM

The most important concept I got from reading the Tao was to "be like water" during an encounter. A very interesting concept, imo, in a formless technique while sparring.

Quote:

Just because JKD can be very difficult to teach at a dojo, does not mean what they teach at that dojo, is invaluable.

This is a very true statement. What I was speaking mostly of was my personal account of a particular school I went to that taught JKD. Being told that I must unlearn everything I had learned (Second Kyu in Shotokan, and 3 years with Kempo) left a very bad taste in my mouth. What should have been said was to take what I know and use it to develop further, imo.

**TheManWhoCan** · September 26th, 2006, 08:46 PM

"The most important concept I got from reading the Tao was to "be like water" during an encounter. A very interesting concept, imo, in a formless technique while sparring."

That's one of the most important concepts for me as well. After reading about it, then understanding what is meant by formless form, it really opend my eyes as to how obvious some of my attacks were. It helped the training alot.

"Being told that I must unlearn everything I had learned (Second Kyu in Shotokan, and 3 years with Kempo) left a very bad taste in my mouth. What should have been said was to take what I know and use it to develop further, imo."

I can understand that. I don't think telling somebody to forget everything you've ever learned, just so you can learn what we teach, is the right way to go about doing things. It should really be up to the practitioner what he should unlearn/learn.

iancobb00 · September 26th, 2006, 10:46 PM

These are the types of posts I look forward to reading!

It's amazing how a simple phrase about water can redefine everything one knows about the arts.

mushfoot · January 10th, 2008, 07:59 PM

I've been doing Krav Maga for several months after ditching various martial arts, and I'm loving the raw-ness of Krav. As far as i'm concerned, the other martial arts have too many boundaries and their training can't compare!

you should give it a go

alohanema · January 30th, 2008, 03:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iancobb00

I've been meaning to ask this...
Does anyone on this site presently study JKD or some art focused on street fighting (Krav, Military, etc.)? I'd really like to get some voices in here; JKD is a wonderful study to look at simply because--as per Bruce's concept--there's no right or wrong way to do things.
So if anybody has some techniques they like to use with JKD concepts/ Street Fighting concepts, questions, answers, etc. , please share.

My contribution... JKD in MMA.
I once saw a fighter at the Madtown Throwdown--an MMA comp run by the guys I'm presently training with in Madison Wisconsin--who claimed to be a JKD fighter. However, when he stepped in, he had nothing to show for himself. (The fight ended with him getting caught with a semi-accidental can opener of all things; he had to be carried out on a stretcher!!!)
My former instructor studied JKD under a J. Miller(?), who trained under Paul Vunak. JKD is supposed to be the primary art taught at his school; nevertheless, he uses none of the concepts he teaches when he fights. (Luke Cumo is another example of a JKD fighter turned MMA competitor who falls under the same category.)
These items perplex me. Any thoughts?

I love Jeet Kune Do too and Bruce Lee especially the way he thought