Was Bruce Lee a fighter? And did he make JKD to actually be a fighting art?

I have been recently been reading a lot of articles about Bruce Lee by Joe Lewis. In his interviews he states that in all of their training he never sparred with Bruce once. He also stated that most of Bruce Lee's training did not consist of actual sparring but mainly drills and theory and he was really not a "fighter." Given the fact that Bruce Lee has no professional fight record I really see no reason to discount what Lewis says in these interviews. He then goes on to say that even one of Bruce Lee's best students, Dan Inosanto, is not a fighter and did not practice much sparing either. This is certainly not the way I have seen both Bruce Lee and JKD portrayed. It is just confusing to me because I thought the whole point of JKD was to create an effective way to fight where classical martial arts were not effective. But how can the founder of such an art not base his training and research on his own experiences in actual fighting. I was wondering if anybody else has thoughts on this subject.

Did Jow Lewis ever challenge Mr Lee?

Someone with that level of fitness, speed and timing is dangerous.

Not a pro fighter, but who would want to fight Mr Lee (when he was alive) in a non controlled environment? Not me.

You can tell if people can fight by the way they move, hit, etc in training. Bruce was one of them.

Benny the Jet may be an "old man" now, but I wouldn't break into his house...

Lee probably trained nearly entirely on specifocs once he got so good.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by joesixpack:
You can tell if people can fight by the way they move, hit, etc in training. Bruce was one of them.

.[/QUOTE]


wow! sorry Joe but that is very very wrong. Its usually people who look good in training but have never fought who look like crap when actually fighting.... training and fighting are worlds apart mate and to be honest there are lots of perfect techniques in training, fighting is a very different thing....

....if Bruce does have a low fight record, if the man had no experience fighting then i would agree and say he is just a fit individual who knows martial arts.

You need to fight to be good at fighting, you cannot, or its extremely rare, be good at fighting without fighting.

Bruce never DID compile a competitive fight record. Bruce was a genius and a philosopher more so than a fighter, although many do contend that he did in fact spar, and would spar all out.

I doubt he sparred with Lewis. Lewis WAS a fighter and a champ. Lee was a movie star. My thinking has it that Lee's status as a martial arts movie star wasn't to be compromised by sparring with anyone who might beat him. That's pretty much the case with all martial arts movie stars -- they rarely ever seem to fight anyone (or spar). Don Wilson was an exception, although he wasn't much of a movie star either.

Just some thoughts

-John

I think that Bruce's understanding of martial arts would make him an extremely deadly fighter i.e. he knows what works.

What made Lee amazing was his training methods...running what 6 miles a day, weight lifting...heavy bag training, Wing Chung dummy training etc...

In terms of the art he form JKD (his JKD has feats ony he could do e.g sliding side kicks) and so the techniques he choose would only work for him and would not necessarily work for anyone else...

I understand that each JKD fighter has to for his own art...using the principles Bruce layed out...

Bruce was Chinese and he was influenced by Chinese philosophy.

In Bhuddism (a religion that influence the original arts) you are encouraged to read what is written in the holy book, think about it and see if it is true in your life. If you don't agree with it you leave it and move on to another reading.

This is the principle behind JKD you look at an art and see if it is useful. If it is not useful you leave it...

Therefore what is useful to me will not be useful to you...it depends on personal attributes like opinions, knowledge level etc.

I don't know JKD but I understand the philosopy...

What is a sliding side kick?

You are standing to my right side,I am standing in horse stance(simpler to explain,not necessary to be in horse stance).I decide I want to kick you, but you are slightly out of range.I slide my left foot over to my right,side kick you with right leg.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MuayThai:

wow! sorry Joe but that is very very wrong. Its usually people who look good in training but have never fought who look like crap when actually fighting.... training and fighting are worlds apart mate and to be honest there are lots of perfect techniques in training, fighting is a very different thing....

....if Bruce does have a low fight record, if the man had no experience fighting then i would agree and say he is just a fit individual who knows martial arts.

You need to fight to be good at fighting, you cannot, or its extremely rare, be good at fighting without fighting.[/QUOTE]

You, kind Sir, are rambling.

Rambling? Come one JKogas does this all the time....

beside it was JKogas himself who first said that you cannot learn to fight with out fighting...now when someone else says it they are rambling...

Bruce might not have had a Professional fight record but he did fight plenty. Before he moved to the U.S it was common to fight on the streets of Hong Kong. He also had to fight to be able to teach here and He fought numerous times on his sets by would be movie stars out to steal the spotlight. Also due to the fact that he was teaching three different champions at the same time it must be assumed that he was an excellent fighter because why would someone who was already a champ learn anything from someone who could not beat them?

My point was, how the hell would MT know wether how well I can judge a person's fighting ability by the way I analyse their training methods, fitness and "style" (game, if you prefer)?

Bruce was known for his street brawling, admitted stuff on camera was too flashy, was fast, very fit, had a good theory and could hit hard.

Would you break into his house?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chen Zen:
Bruce might not have had a Professional fight record but he did fight plenty. Before he moved to the U.S it was common to fight on the streets of Hong Kong. He also had to fight to be able to teach here and He fought numerous times on his sets by would be movie stars out to steal the spotlight. Also due to the fact that he was teaching three different champions at the same time it must be assumed that he was an excellent fighter because why would someone who was already a champ learn anything from someone who could not beat them?[/QUOTE]

So you would never learn from a teacher that you could beat in a fight? What if a muay thai boxer can beat one of the best bjj guys in the world. Does that mean he should not learn bjj from him? Fighting "actors" on a set is one thing, but fighting professional fights is another. If I told you I beat a lot of actors would you give me respect, I hope not. I have met many people who have fought on the streets, I have even done a small amount of it from time to time, but that does not always mean that you can fight, and no everybody in China does not know kung fu so the question is were any of these "street fighters" and "actors" truly skilled. Theory is a wonderful thing. You first need a game plan before you actually do something. So what if Bruce was more about theory than actual application in an alive environment. Does that mean I cannot take his theory and apply it effectively. Hell no. There are many fighters who recieve training from people who have never fought. If you notice the champions that Bruce Lee trained already knew how to fight. They did not need him to teach them that, but he was able to give them that little extra to propel them to the next level. I have never heard of Bruce training anybody from "scratch" and making them into a fighting machine, but his principles can do wonders when someone is already versed in a "delivery system." It is that system where you learn to "fight," and it is Bruce's teaching that helps one put it altogether.

Great post. My sentiments exactly.


-John

You guys are only capitalizing on Chen Zen last sentence.

But the rest of it is true not because Bruce didn't have a fight record didn't mean that he didn't actually fight. Who knows who he was before he came from Hong Kong...his fight record may be in Hong Kong for all you know.

-Just some thoughts...

Exactly my point. And for the record, no I would not train under someone I can beat. If I can beat you its because your technique is flawed and I do not intend to add flawed technique to my training regimen.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chen Zen:
Exactly my point. And for the record, no I would not train under someone I can beat. If I can beat you its because your technique is flawed and I do not intend to add flawed technique to my training regimen.[/QUOTE]

So are you saying that the only reason a person loses a fight is because his technique is not as good as his opponent. What about heart, timing, speed, strength, power, etc. I have seen people with bad technique, but are naturally fast. Although they can not hit as hard as they could if they possesed better technique, they have enough power to knock somebody out and enough speed and timing to connect. I would rather learn from somebody who has excellent knowledge of their style and can teach rather than someone who is simply a good fighter. Just because you can fight does not mean that you can teach and viceversa. For instance Mark Kerr trained with and studied under Bass Ruten for a while, and was better for it. If he could have beaten Bas(which is a possiblity) should he have refused to study under him? That does not make any sense to me. Does that mean an undefeated champion should not learn from anyone since nobody can defeat him? Mike Tyson would have killed Cus Demato, but he was his trainer and he was great when he was being trained from Cus.

That's garbage Chen. I think of myself as an average 2nd Dan in a good style, for being a 21 yo man, but I know I am a much better teacher than a figher...etc

Would I learn from someone I could beat. Certainly.

He may be better than me at some things, and I at others. As such I have no problem learning from him.

Also, look at boxers. All the best boxers learn from people they can beat. They have trainers they can beat, sparring partners they can beat etc.

Taking the subject back to it's original topic though;

As far as I am aware, Bruce Lee had no documented fight record. As such, I find it interesting that a lot of BL fans quote him as saying would you learn swimming from someone who can't swim.

Seems like people provide quotes with a slight bias to justify their own arguments.

JohnL

The conversation about learning from someone you can beat stemmed from the example of Bruce lee teaching other champs like joe lewis and chuck norris. Obviously Bruce was fast, had much power and technique so on and etc. Now given that he possessed these attributes if he could have been beaten by Chuck or Joe then it was because of flawed technique. Also I think any good teacher should be able to fight better than his students because he has more experience and a better understanding of the system. Shoalin Monks fight even in their late sixties and probably even older and are quite confident in doing so.

So you are saying that Tyson, Ali, Gracie etc all had trainers or teachers that could beat them? If I was traing a world champ and i could beat them, why aren't I competing?

Hi Chen Zen

A couple of notes on your post:

"Obviously Bruce was fast, had much power and technique so on and etc."

Why obviously. There are no records of fights, no videos of fighting and the only word passed down is that of his fans. As such distortions are entirely probable.

"Now given that he possessed these attributes if he could have been beaten by Chuck or Joe then it was because of flawed technique."

If Lee had these, why do you pick on his technique as being flawed. It could have been any number of things.

"Also I think any good teacher should be able to fight better than his students because he has more experience and a better understanding of the system."

Again, look at boxing as a prime example. The trainers cannot beat the people they are training.

"Shoalin Monks fight even in their late sixties and probably even older and are quite confident in doing so."

Says who. Where are the fight records. If you're to make me believe that a 65 year old monk could hold his own against todays top fighters, there had better be some evidence to support it. Sounds like the perpetuation of myths to me.

JohnL

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chen Zen:
The conversation about learning from someone you can beat stemmed from the example of Bruce lee teaching other champs like joe lewis and chuck norris. Obviously Bruce was fast, had much power and technique so on and etc. Now given that he possessed these attributes if he could have been beaten by Chuck or Joe then it was because of flawed technique. Also I think any good teacher should be able to fight better than his students because he has more experience and a better understanding of the system. Shoalin Monks fight even in their late sixties and probably even older and are quite confident in doing so.[/QUOTE]Chen, where's the proof? [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/cool.gif[/IMG]

As for Bruces attributes look at the videos of him demonstrating the difference in power between karate strikes and JKD. Im sure you can find them on a google search but Im not going to do all your homework for you. As for shoalin monks Ive personally seen them do demonstrations and the feats they pull of are inhuman. As for teachers competing, not everyone chooses to compete. As for boxing, I just dont care about boxing. Would tyson beat Cus Demato, yes, if he could hit him but tyson is a one move guy and Demato has the experience and know how to find a way around one technique.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by joesixpack:
My point was, how the hell would MT know wether how well I can judge a person's fighting ability by the way I analyse their training methods, fitness and "style" (game, if you prefer)?

Bruce was known for his street brawling, admitted stuff on camera was too flashy, was fast, very fit, had a good theory and could hit hard.

Would you break into his house?[/QUOTE]


Mate, i dont care who you are, how many years you have been doing martial arts for or how many students you teach, you can not asses the fighting ability of any man by simply watching him train. If you say you can then I am sorry to say but you have a lot to learn.

I fight competitively and the only way you can really asses fighting ability is by watching them fight, no other way.

When people train, or show of in training this only means they are good at training, nothing else, 1000's of people look damn hot when training, and I have seen this, once they step in the ring, BAM!!! they look and perform like beginners. I didnt mean to put you down but i strongly disagree with you. I am not the man who thought this up but it is a fact of fighting, training and fighting are two different things.... you will disagree, I know you will, its no problem.

Ask some fighters, training and fighting, very different.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chen Zen:
As for Bruces attributes look at the videos of him demonstrating the difference in power between karate strikes and JKD.[/QUOTE]

Thats not fighting, that does not give a good example of Bruce Lee fighting. When he is demonstrating any technique he is only demonstrating a technique. Fighting is a lot mor than demonstration and theories. Trust me on that, I think Bruce may have been a wicked Martial artist because of his determination but mate there are literally 1000's of Bruce Lee's, even during his time! The problem is Bruce was the first to make it big time in the Movies.

Could the guy fight? I am sure he could but i could give you a list of people at his time who fighting under his rules would have probably KO'd him very quickly.

Bruce was an artist, pure and simple and to think any different is really forgeting what fighting is all about. It aint about theories and demonstrations, movie making or self promotion.... its about fighting, full stop!

Power. Bruce just had good technique. Mike Tyson can hit with the power of a small bus travelling at 30kh!!! Plenty of Boxers could and do hit bloody hard, he wasnt the only guy to posses power but he was a very lucky man to have made it BIG!

I think too many people think of Bruce Lee as some kind of demi God, he wasnt, he was probably at an average fighting level where pro fighters are concerned, he was human, he had limits he had flaws and he sure as hell wasnt invincible.

Gene Lebell would lift this guy of the ground and toss him in the air. Bruce was subdued by Gene I believe.

Dude I think Bruce was a fighter wether he had a fight record or not or wether he was invincible or not.

Well I can say I think [I don't know], but from what I heard about him from people like Chuck Norris and so on about his power...I wouldn't want to be the one to step in the ring with him to find out.<<I can say that.

[This message has been edited by Shotokan (edited 01-19-2004).]

Bottom line-there is no evidence to suggest Bruce lee was any kind of fighter.

There is no record of him fighting anyone much past his Wing Chuan days in Hong Kong.

There are a couple of contested incidents, however eyewitness testimony from them seems to conflict in a number of points.

On the other hand you have a number of guys that demonstrated fighting ability SAY that Bruce could fight.

Chances are we will never really know.

There is no direct evidence (other than hearsay) of Bruce's skills. What is NOT in question was his brilliance and insight into simplistic efficiency in training. I couldn't care less of Lee could fight or not. I'm sure he could fend for himself quite well, considering how hard the man trained. Whether he could or couldn't doesn't have a THING to do with the individual JKD practitioner.


-John

As for shoalin monks Ive personally seen them do demonstrations and the feats they pull of are inhuman. They'er not realy shoalin monks,But are being payed by the chinese government to play the part . [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

[This message has been edited by Isshinryukid4life (edited 01-21-2004).]

Jkogas


Sorry but I have to disagree here.

From my perspective Lee didn't say or advocate much that had not already been said and done by others.

Even his famous "be like water" quote has its roots in the saying and works of others.

He was an absolute master of PR and promotion. He was relentless in his training and research into training.

Just don't think that his approach was as "novel" as many people think.

cxt,
I agree 100%.
JKogas,
Read "The Twenty Guiding Principles of Karate: The Spiritual Legacy of the Master" by Gichin Funakoshi. Bruce Lee merely repeated what had been said by many before.

But he aid it so that everyone could hear and understand it not just the eastern Martial arts world. Also the video of Bruce's demonstration doesnt prove that he could fight but it does show that he had the attributes of an amazing fighter. Sure Mike tyson and other boxers have power but look at the size difference. Bruce was 130 pounds. Proportionate to his body his forearms were bigger than anyone Ive ever met.

Rookie -- There's nothing new under the sun.


-John

JKogas,
Touche! I can't agrue with that. However, if that is the case and we agree that he did not come up with his concepts, on what basis are you judging him "brilliant"?

[This message has been edited by rookie (edited 01-22-2004).]

Yep for his size he was a powerful man. Mike Tyson is fat @$$ loser. Sorry if I a little biased but I have a little trouble respecting that guy.

If there is indeed nothing new under the sun, there we could then argue that NO ONE is brilliant. But I think we all know better.

Lee's brilliance was in several areas; in his ability to think outside the box, his willingness to buck tradition and the politics thereof, his use of modern, athletic training methods at a time when very little was done in any modern sort of way.

So many people want things "spoon fed" to them. That's why people put so much faith in "styles", when styles aren't what fights for you. Lee was about freedom of thinking and chosing to do things in a different way. He was a maverick, and those types will always be seen as brilliant - providing that they have a method to their madness based in truth. His was.

In that sense, he was no more brilliant that perhaps so many others who've come about and gone. He just got more recognition because he was a movie star.
Jigoro Kano was ANOTHER brilliant martial arts "thinker" of his time. There were many, many others and always will be.

Perhaps brilliance is just the recognition of brilliance and the ability to see things simply (harder than one at first thinks).

-John

[This message has been edited by JKogas (edited 01-24-2004).]

Let me just say that I am against posts like these that somehow question other beliefs or choosen arts. Something people do alot on this forum. There is nothing you will get from posting something like this here, but comments and opinions that aren't worthy because the majority of response are from people who never trained in the criticized art and don't know what the heck they are talking about. On the other hand they can a fun way about learning about other arts in the process of people trying to defend and explain misunderstandings etc.

If you don't agree or understand something ask for clarification. If you still don't understand afterwards give it up and realize that it is due to your own persona beliefs and preferences. Therefore it is uneconomical to continue such a discussion that will lead nowhere.

The topic of discussion will change after a couple of posts. After the participants agree on the key subject they will single out and almost attack the other person for his individual differences on the agreed subject, even though the original topic of discussion was already been mutually agreed on. They won't stop until one of them feels he is totally right. On the other hand these post can be quite educational.

-Shotokan

[This message has been edited by Shotokan (edited 01-24-2004).]

If we don't question how can we grow?

Question EVERYTHING!


-John

Question in a critical but friendly and respectful manner. It would help to acknowledge the positives before you question your perceived negatives.

Well you can grow while maintaining a healthy environment for discussion.

[This message has been edited by Shotokan (edited 01-24-2004).]

I understand your points Shotokan, but the questioning generally revolves around what are seen as negatives. That's why they're questioned.

-John

I will start off by agreeing you can't entirely judge a fighter by his or her training in a controlled environment.I will than go on to say yes i absolutely believe Lee was a very good fighter in his own right.The art of JKD is essentially a combat art for real life encounters.Lee has no (official) record of fighting but so what???So some guy beats up another guy within a ring area and all of the sudden we can guarantee that that man is an incredible fighter? why?Yes he may be a great UFC fighter etc but to street fight as opposed to any kind of controlled fighting should never be mistaken.I have never fought in a ring but have had my share of street fights and have beaten other people i knew who were trained or wrestling etc but on the street its all different.Lee has actually boxed in a ring in his teenage days in china.Lewis also never said Lee wasn't a fighter he simply stated that out of all Lee's students he alone was a true fighter in the sense of competitive fighting and thus he was Lee's most prominent student.Lee has many accounts of his fighting on the street and never losing.He also was known for sparring all the time during training.It is also on record that any demonstrations Lee did he would tell his sparring oponents to do whatever they could do to hit him etc, they never did a controlled set spar or pattern.Lee has always maintained training for real world combat and many of his principles could not be used inside a ring with rules.The man was physically gifted with knowledge and a determination which any man who wants to be good at anyhting can only admire.I must say some people need to rethink this whole yeah people said he was this and that but thats his fans etc.Why in the world would known professional fighting people like Bob wall and Chuck Norris etc help push along this man as a great fighter etc?If i had trained and foguht my way up like Norris i would be anything but complimentary to a man who was full of it.Dan inosanto was a former student of Ed Parker who was known for his fiery temper and conflicts with people.Many students left Parker in favor of Lee's teaching which would say to me the guy had something special.I lastly think the man was too proud and to hard working to perpetuate some false sense of ability in his students.I believe he was an honest man with integrity loved by most who actually KNEW the man so i see no need for him to lie about said conflicts nor the many honorable men who have witnessed them just to push along a simple 18 yr old man from china into icon status.I enjoy and respect everything the man and his art means to me and would hope everyone else would as well.But again fighting in a ring is not the end all of true fighting.Tank abbot , shamrock and many others are considered all this and that but they are also average by so called today standards so where do you draw the line from what is real or fake?Keep Lee's memory well and wether u agree or disagree only one man truly knew and he is sadly missed.Thanks Rich.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MuayThai:

Could the guy fight? I am sure he could but i could give you a list of people at his time who fighting under his rules would have probably KO'd him very quickly.


I think too many people think of Bruce Lee as some kind of demi God, he wasnt, he was probably at an average fighting level where pro fighters are concerned, he was human, he had limits he had flaws and he sure as hell wasnt invincible.[/QUOTE]

OK there I would have to disagree with you. If there were so many people who could KO him quickly then where were they when he had his world wide challange where he would fight ANYONE, anywhere, under any rule. Do you see my point. He was willing to fight anyone, and if he really wasn't confident thet he could win, why would he put up that kind of challange.(Just a note - the person who fought him lost within 3 minutes. He was a master of martial arts and he ran away from Bruce.Bruce cought him though [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gif[/IMG] )

Nobody is saying that Bruce was some kind of god, he was just a REALLY good martial artist. He is also not invincible, but I can say with confidence that if Bruce were to fight someone his size, he would win.

Don't believe everything you read.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bruce Lee:
OK there I would have to disagree with you. If there were so many people who could KO him quickly then where were they when he had his world wide challange where he would fight ANYONE, anywhere, under any rule. Do you see my point. He was willing to fight anyone, and if he really wasn't confident thet he could win, why would he put up that kind of challange.(Just a note - the person who fought him lost within 3 minutes. He was a master of martial arts and he ran away from Bruce.Bruce cought him though [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gif[/IMG] )

Nobody is saying that Bruce was some kind of god, he was just a REALLY good martial artist. He is also not invincible, but I can say with confidence that if Bruce were to fight someone his size, he would win. [/QUOTE]Dude, You need to get out more. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vash:
Don't believe everything you read.[/QUOTE]


I herd his wife say it in a documentary. She was there, so thats why I beleive it.


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Isshinryukid4life:
Dude, You need to get out more. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG]
[/QUOTE]


Why, just because I know some facts about Bruce Lee.

I have read most of this post but stopped cause it was getting stagnated, you were saying that bruce didnt have a PROFESSIONAL fight record, that doesnt mean he can't... secondly are you going against years of thinking, that he was great. If other fighters say he was good then i believe them, they know more than you. Bruce was exceptional, his ideas and philosophy were phenomenal and dont discount him because of his PROFESSIONAL record...

Alan

There is no evidence that Bruce Lee was in any way "exceptional."

2nd hand claims do not count. We also have conflicting 2nd hand claims by "professionals."

Joe Lewis has been quoted as making statements agreeing with and DIS-agreeing with Bruce Lees fighting ability. Not what you call any kind of "proof."

There is simply no supportable evidence that much past his childhood "Wing Chun" days Bruce had any sort of "real fight."

In addition a good amount of what is commonly attributed to Lee was in fact written by others decades even centuries prior to Lee's birth.

According to some sources his famous "be like water" quote had been said almost verbatim by Motobu decades prior to Lee and was the concept itself can be traced to the swordsman Mushasi centiures earlier.
It goes even father back than that in China.

I mean no disrespect to his memory but PR is not proof.

I have just joined this forum, & have read as much as I could about the previous threads. My appoligies if I am repeting things. I have just read a great book that indicates several people who did in fact see Bruce in action. As he was noted in Hong Kong to be a good fighter, who lost many battles during his gang days. As he learned Wing Chun his battles became victories, as many opponents fell to his amazing power. Was Bruce a fighter ? Yes but as he extended his Wing Chun phylosophies turning them, manipulating them,adding what was missing he divised a system that became Jun Fan, then later to become Jeet Kun Do. Joe Lewis never spared VS Bruce Lee, but used many of his fighting skills. People where stunned when Joe Lewis fought using these new skills.
Later...

Bruce used his Wing Chun to help the triads?

[This message has been edited by Shotokan (edited 02-06-2004).]

Bruce was part of a gang, sorry i should of specified,,, Not Triads. It was a small group, only six or eight members. It was not a big thing, they fought on roof tops.

Bruce was part of a gang, not the Triads. It was a six or eight member gang that fought on roof tops in Hong Kong.

kobun

Sorry man, whatever he may have done as a teen-ager (please check his date of birth and when he started training in Wing Chuan)

It is not good support for his fighting ability.

We also have guys that trained with him in "the old days" in Wing Chuan that say he lost a number of fights as well.

So are we now to think that the guys that beat him as a kid are "better fighters than Bruce Lee" that they are "the man that beat Bruce Lee"

I didn't check the dates, but this author haschecked all the data. Although some aspects could be hard to verify. Yes as a teen he was beat many times, a matter a fact his mother wanted him to move to the states due to all the fights. As for the other teens who won vs him, I have no data to verify how good they became as time passed. In this book the author Bruce Thomas also talks about many others who witnessed Bruces power. In fact they comment that he could not go all out against someone for fear of injuries to others.

Being a follower of JKD, whatever Lee could or couldn't do isn't important. JKD isn't about Lee anyway, but about the individual. It's more important about what *I* can do, in other words.

I don't know about Lee's abilities. It's all hearsay. What IS known is that Lee was an extremely hard worker and trained constantly, especially within Wing Chun. He couldn't have been a "tomato can", if you know what I mean. But again, it's really irrelevent in the grand scheme of things. At least for me it is.


-John

To answer the thread, one of Bruces great freinds said of a conflict where Bruce won the fight, but was winded. He realised then that 1) he had to train like a fighter, 2) that some of the moves & techniques he knew were in fact to classical. Thus I would have to conclude that he created a fighting art.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bruce Lee:
If there were so many people who could KO him quickly then where were they when he had his world wide challange where he would fight ANYONE, anywhere, under any rule. Do you see my point.


I can say with confidence that if Bruce were to fight someone his size, he would win. [/QUOTE]

No, Bruce may have offered a challenge but not all ears heard it and I am sure not many really cared about it either..... What i am saying is there are a couple of big countries that spawn some of the worlds greatest ever fighters, that is not an understatement, when i say great I mean bloody great.... its daft to think Bruce was "the best", there was way better then and even now! WAY BETTER!!! I say quick KO and I mean quick KO.

I can say with confidence that if Bruce were to fight a fighter of my choice and also the fighter of my choice was giving Bruce a weight advantage I reckon Bruce would get KO'd! simple.

Well, it's really all speculative isn't it? Lee's abilities are also irrelevent to JKD and the individual practitioner in the same way that Dave Schultz's ability in wrestling is irrelevent to MY wrestling ability.

Aside from all that, JKD isn't an 'art' so much as it is a philosophy which governs one's training.


-John

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JKogas:
Well, it's really all speculative isn't it? Lee's abilities are also irrelevent to JKD and the individual practitioner in the same way that Dave Schultz's ability in wrestling is irrelevent to MY wrestling ability.

Aside from all that, JKD isn't an 'art' so much as it is a philosophy which governs one's training.


-John[/QUOTE]

Kogas, but isn't that what an art better suited for individualized training. In karate we learn kata not to learn a preset curriculum of fighting combinations, but to learn the principles of body movement and power generation when fighting. These include but are not limited to intercepting attacks before they reach full extension, covering the centerline of you body, maintaining balance, keeping you elbows in, tucking you chin, how to best manipulate joints, not overextending yourself when attacking, how to use body weight and momentum when attacking and still maintaining you balance and using the ground for stability, etc. I think the key to art is expression. Learning principles and then applying them to your own body type, mental state, intentions when fighting, etc. is what an "art" is all about. Actually I think an "art" allows for greater variety and unpredictability when fighting. A philosophy is actually more rigid. One can prove or disprove a philosophy, but if you change a philosophy it becomes different. Therefore, it is harder to stick to one philosophy while training than an "art". An "art" allows for true expression of oneself just like in music, painting, literature, etc. A philosophy simply covers a particular aspect as seen from a particular point of view. However, an art encompasses anything the mind can conceive of in an area. Of course somethings are effective and somethings are not, but once those effective fighting methods are isolated then it is up to the individual to customize their fighting style to fit them as a unique person, not just a carbon copy of everybody else. I think an art allows for this where simply sticking to one man's philosophy is restrictive on certain levels. That is unless the philosophy encourages artistic expression in the same way the "art" of karate does.

Therein lies some confusion.

JKD AS a philosophy, chooses the "arts" of which you're going to be training in (after all, you've got to have something to fight with, right?

The arts (delivery systems) that JKD draws upon all have something in common with each other. The is important to establish "flow" throughout the ranges. For example, in boxing you keep your elbows in tight. In wrestling, you keep your elbows in tight. In Brazilian jiu-jitsu, you keep your elbows in tight (especially on the bottom). The structure is the same througout each.

JKD's philosophy stresses ability throughout all ranges. Thus, you'll see JKD guys fighting and rolling around on the ground, in the clinch and standing. It's the attribute of adaptability that one is concerned with.

Certainly, other arts stress the same points. That's all well and good. JKD is not better nor worse than any other art. What is important is how you TRAIN the art. That's all that really matters.

However, JKD places emphasis on economy of motion, a tight defensive structure, simple aggressive fight plan (the RAT method, as it is termed now), etc.

The best thing to do is to LOOK at the different approaches to training and fighting that these different methods have. All of the internet typing in the WORLD isn't going to adequately describe the differences. All one needs to do is look at how people are training to see what I'm talking about. Visit ANY school.

This week, I'm paying a visit to the Japanese Karate Institute in Winston-Salem just to watch a typical session. I'll do this once a week for a few weeks. We'll see how differnt it is to the local aikido school, the local TKD school, the local wing chun school, and finally MY school/gym.

I'll post about what I find.


-John

[This message has been edited by JKogas (edited 02-15-2004).]

See, i find it very hard to believe that people actually think that Bruce Lee wasn't a fighter. To whoever questions any Martial Artist's ability to fight, let me ask you one question: If you can defeat you oponent with your mind before even the first punch is thrown, are you less of a fighter than soemone who has to punch and kick his way to victory? And regarding Bruce lee, anyone who says he wasnt a fighter should know that he had reached such a position in his training and life that he didnt need to fight to actually "fight". He knew he was well capable of fighting phyically, so he moved on to the next level of Martial Arts.

Isnt that what eveyr martian arts teach? Rememebr, Martial Arts were not meant for only physical defence and/or offence. They were meant a a means to self discipline and a way of life.

If the doubters, who seem to know all about what it means to be a "fighter" take the time to look into the Martial Arts more deeply, they will see that the eventual goal of all Martial Arts is to reach a state of spiritual enlightment. And that is reached through training and focusing the body.

So for Clearance purposes, Bruce Lee had passed the point where he needed to use brute force to win a fight. His demeanor and mental strenght were enough to win any fight. P.S. If he did get into any physical fight, we all know that he would kick the other guys ass cuz Bruce Lee was most probably the fastest and most accurate when it came to delivering blows. His body was capable of taking lots of damge, so i dont really see how he is is not a fighter.

I hope that answers all the questions people had about bruce lee and whether or not he was a fighter, because remember, a ifghter isnt a perosn who cna throw a punch or kick, anyone can do that, a fighter is soemone who has the physicaland mental balance and power to overcome any problems or any obstacles in his/her path.

If you need another example of a fighter, look at Terry Fox. He battled cancer and ran for miles and miles till he couldnt fight it anymore. You cant say that he wanst a fighter because he fought his amputation and cancer and ran all those miles. SO i hope there are no more misconceptions about what a fighter is and whether or not bruce lee was a fighter. Peace.

Ninja

[QUOTE]

In addition a good amount of what is commonly attributed to Lee was in fact written by others decades even centuries prior to Lee's birth.

According to some sources his famous "be like water" quote had been said almost verbatim by Motobu decades prior to Lee and was the concept itself can be traced to the swordsman Mushasi centiures earlier.
It goes even father back than that in China.
[/QUOTE]
In the Tao of JKD by Bruce, one of the very first things said is "this is nothing special. This is nothing new and people looking for the "inner secret" will be lost upon it."

Now i am confused-dont take much.

I always thought bruce lee had to fight certain fighters from his own country in order to teach to westeners? Sorta like a death match of sorts-is this just hype?

cheers

I thought bruce had to fight in types of secret deathmatch against fighters from his own country just to prove he could teach westeners-is this all hype?

As far as I am aware, Bruce Lee had no documented fight record. As such, I find it interesting that a lot of BL fans quote him as saying would you learn swimming from someone who can't swim.

Seems like people provide quotes with a slight bias to justify their own arguments.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Learned to swim as a result of lessons from my old man who could not at swim at the time but could teach. Another one of the best swimming coaches I ever saw could not swim either.

Ability to teach is NOT based upon ability to do. Of course a demo helps but it is not essential. i'm no rabid BL fan by the way...just the swimming allusion got me because of personal history.

As for Bruce...he was unusual unqiue and clever. A phenomenon though how much was media hype and how much was real we will never really know.

As far as I know, Bruce Lee was in competition I think around in the 60's, Bruce was involved in Ed Parkers Karate tournament. There were alot of highly skilled masters there, those who challenged Bruce Lee, and lost. This is from my recollection of facts I heard from others students and pictures, I am not certain this really happened.
First of all, going back to the original post, JKD was not any type of fighting style, it really was'nt. JKD was a philosophy of Bruce Lee's fighting methods and training. Bruce Lee's original kung-fu style was Ving Tsun. Bruce Lee was an experienced Martial Artist who realized that alot of the traditional methods in Wing Chung, were'nt really effective and alot of it probably would not work in a real life situation. So, this idea in mind, he created JKD.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JKogas:
Question EVERYTHING!


-John[/QUOTE]

JKD is weapons based kali sticks, nunchaku, stopped developing when bruce lee died. Developed by others after his death, it was only beginning, no ground work, grappling stances for lower centre of gravity. Bai joing basic stance too limited. Weapons first, no weapons if no other choice. Did joe lewis use weapons then he could have sparred with Bruce lee. Chuck norris or joe lewish would have their reputation and credentials as top fighters challenged.
Joe lewis and chuck Norris know class when they see it.

As someone has already said he could obviously teach and that in the long run is more important in than fighting ability.

He was also the first really well known MAist, a bit like Elvis & rock & roll. Not the first but the first household name. In that sense he is always going to have a semi mythical status.

I propose a separate section on the forum for BL questions so the rest of can talk about more interesting stuff!!!

Jeet Kune Do is the philosophy of the art that the late Bruce Lee taught. The actual art itself is a modified form of Wing Chun. I think it is a misnomer to identify his fighting style by the name of the philosophy that governs it.

the only dead man I see getting more attention than bruce lee is jesus.

thank you for my daily larf

Uriel, Jesus isnt dead [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG]

just had to say that

Neither is Bruce apparently...

-John

Of course he isn't!

He's right up there with Elvis and John F. in space.

Duh!


lol.


-Dan

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JKogas:
Question EVERYTHING!


-John[/QUOTE]
http://www.tommycarruthers.com/video.htm
back on line and bandwitch problem sorted
"Rock on tommy" a taste of what JKD "bruce fighting system".

http://www.tommycarruthers.com/video.htm
back on line bandwitch problem sorted "Rock on tommy". A taste of what JKD "bruce fighting methods" can accomplish.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by pete:
http://www.tommycarruthers.com/video.htm
back on line bandwitch problem sorted "Rock on tommy". A taste of what JKD "bruce fighting methods" can accomplish.[/QUOTE]

Just incase Pete's continual double posting didn't get the message through. I, out of the kindness of my heart, will post it a third time.

:: wonders if Pete suffers from Houghes Syndrome... ::

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JohnL:
Would I learn from someone I could beat. Certainly.

He may be better than me at some things, and I at others. As such I have no problem learning from him.

Also, look at boxers. All the best boxers learn from people they can beat. They have trainers they can beat, sparring partners they can beat etc.

Seems like people provide quotes with a slight bias to justify their own arguments.

JohnL

[/QUOTE]


i agree with this. you can always learn something from someone if you look hard enough and listen intently. whether i train for a fight or just train, i spar and train with people of many levels and we always learn from each other. for example, i often spar with a guy who has a longer fight record then mine and who is a better technical figher than me, but my hands are better and he is scared of my push kick. he learns from me when we train even though he is a better all round MT fighter than me, and i certainly learn from training with him. dont discount what other people can teach you.
i also agree with MuayThai when he said that training and fighting are totally different. training is not the same as fighting. except for very experienced fighters, in the ring adrenaline goes way up and technique degenerates. i find that the more fight experience a person has, the more practical and effective their training methods.

Bruce definetly could fight, to say he could not is absurd. Anyone who is described to have that much power, timing, speed and knowledge can fight.

He does have 4-5 recorded fights..

Quotes from james demile - bruce lee's student:

"I was a heavyweight boxer in the Air Force. Over a four year period I had over a hundred fights and never lost one. I had a very big ego and perceived myself as the toughtest man alive. I was 5ft 10inches and weighted 225. I could knock a man out with either hand. Then I met a small 135 lb 5 ft 7 kid who believed his martial arts could beat anyone. I decided to explain the reality of fighting to him and proceded to show him what street fighting was all about. Needless to say I learned humility in about 5 seconds. He not only stopped me cold, but tied me up in such a way that he could hit me at will and the only thing I could do about it was... nothing. Later I reviewed all my previous skills, including boxing and threw all of it out as it was impractical against Bruce's skills. "

"So far as what people do not ask, I find people do not seem to understand the difference between a fight and a tournament. People always seem to make their questions relate to the the martial arts side of Bruce rather than the fighting side. I wish they would explore the realistic side of Bruce's skill in the street, rather than compare him to tournament fighters. I read some of the comments by Joe Lewis and he always compared Bruce to the martial arts image that everyone saw and yet the Bruce that I knew would have blown Joe Lewis, Chuck Norris and anyone else for that matter that acquired their reputation by playing the game of tournaments. "

"Most of the answers are from people who either did not know him or related their answer how Bruce would have done in a tournament. Joe Lewis is very out front with his comments and yet he always compares Bruce to either his tournament days or some world champion. I really enjoy meeting these people and always look forward to giving my opinion on why Bruce was the best street fighter I ever knew. Not pound for pound, but against anyone in a street fight. I was never in a tournament and had many street fights and I have never seen anyone that I would have been scared to fight, regardless of their Belts and trophies. This goes for UFC and K1. I'm not saying I could beat all of them, I am just saying they are tough, but so what. People do not understand what Bruce did in a real fight. They relate his skills to the movies or JKD. No, that was martial arts. Fighting is survival. It is mean, ugly and stupid and someone can reall be hurt or killed. Bruce knew he could be hurt if he got hit, that is why he believed a street fight should not last over two seconds and his personal skills were designed for that attitde. I am very opinionated and willing to discuss with anyone my belief in why Bruce was the best fighter I ever knew. And I still feel that way, 42 years later. "

If you wanna see bruse lee fight,Go here http://www.funnyjunk.com/pages/bruce.htm BTW Wait for the video to load.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JKogas:
Question EVERYTHING!


-John[/QUOTE]

Bruce wing chun instructor wong shun leung was a street fighter, boxing, wing chun, undefeated, so he had a good background to seeing street fights in kong kong. Wong shun leung fought against several different styles and won. Why teach bruce if the guy is just another wing chun practioner, he was YIP map NO 1 pupil, seen the street fights and has a record against other styles. They kept in touch even when he came to the US. I have yet to see 130lbs person with such power in their side kick, he also demonstrated thai pad, training in fact everything that modern person used today to train for a fight. Not many actors would do all this training just to act.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by pete:
Bruce wing chun instructor wong shun leung was a street fighter, boxing, wing chun, undefeated, so he had a good background to seeing street fights in kong kong. Wong shun leung fought against several different styles and won. Why teach bruce if the guy is just another wing chun practioner, he was YIP map NO 1 pupil, seen the street fights and has a record against other styles. They kept in touch even when he came to the US. I have yet to see 130lbs person with such power in their side kick, he also demonstrated thai pad, training in fact everything that modern person used today to train for a fight. Not many actors would do all this training just to act.[/QUOTE]
Pete,You're a JKD practitioner,So obviously you going to be biased. PS Bruce Lee was a good martial artist,But he was'nt God. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG]

Bruce Lee is the main reason that cross-training became a common MAs phenomenon. His knowledge of Wing Chun was significant enough, and in combination with his athleticism, allowed him to become an exemplary martial artist. His will, intelligence and confidence more than made up for any MAs shortcomings he may of had. Yet he was humble enough to research other fighting systems, studying many of them with the best of their time, and taking those skills that he felt would add to the efficacy of his fighting system.

What he did to popularize the MAs, like Funakoshi and Kano, was immeasurable. Like I've said before, those guys made Asian MAs a worldwide phenomenon. That alone deserves a deep bow and a show of appreciation. Loving their heritage and wanting to preserve it in some form, allows us to say that TKD sucks (J/K)!

Anyway, Bruce would kick all our asses fo' sho'!!!! I still think that he didn't want to make JKD the way it is today. One's perception of things changes as life moves along. He would be in his sixites now, and I think as his skill and knowledge base increased he would have adapted to the times even further. That doesn't mean he would have gone the logical NHB route, but would have understood his core art (Wing Chun/Jun Fan Gung Fu) on a deeper level. This manifestation of combat sport as legit street effective martial art wouldn't have been his cup of tea. He was about winning a street confrontation in an expeditious manner. People who have ever fought on the street understand that real fights aren't the way they're depicted on TV. Bruce had been there and understood that from a fairly young age. That ring stuff is smoke-n-mirrors money making!

Bruce Lee was DEFINITELY A REAL FIGHTER! I think JKD was HIS personal philosophy on MAs. He wanted everyone else to find their own "Tao/Do" eventually.

[This message has been edited by Dr. Krunk-n-stein (edited 06-09-2004).]

You know that poem about how the lucky athelete is the one who dies young. The thing about Bruce Lee was that he died on top, mabey someone was better but nobody can claim that as he died before his skills diminished. Think about how much mistique would have been around say Mike Tyson if he had died mysteriously right after his 90 second knock out of Spinks.

I know very little about anything physical, but I have spent many years learning about learning and teaching. And I will say this: Any teacher whose students are not, eventually, better than he is, is a horrible teacher. Think logically. If every student was worse (learned less and/or less effectively) than his teacher, it would only take a few generations for people to become utter morons. The fact is, with very few exceptions, students are generally better than their teachers. In fact, the better a teacher is, the more the student surpasses the teacher. The job of a teacher, is not, in fact, to be better than the student, but to make the student better than he (the student) already is. You can see this at least in tennis. Any tennis champ can beat his coach in a game, yet he learns from the coach.

Great teachers are always learning -- from everything and everyone. A teacher who is incapable of further learning, at any age and stage, is intellectually and ethically dead, at that point. Most great teachers learn more from their students than from "the ancient texts" or "the experts." Great students are those who have learned not simply their subject, but how their knowledge of their own field of study can enhance their study of other fields. A student who cannot teach what he has learned is a moron. He hasn't really learned anything. A teacher who does not understand that he constantly needs to study is equally a moron, because he is just resting on the laurels of his past knowledge.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Anpadh:
I know very little about anything physical, but I have spent many years learning about learning and teaching. And I will say this: Any teacher whose students are not, eventually, better than he is, is a horrible teacher. Think logically. If every student was worse (learned less and/or less effectively) than his teacher, it would only take a few generations for people to become utter morons. The fact is, with very few exceptions, students are generally better than their teachers. In fact, the better a teacher is, the more the student surpasses the teacher. The job of a teacher, is not, in fact, to be better than the student, but to make the student better than he (the student) already is. You can see this at least in tennis. Any tennis champ can beat his coach in a game, yet he learns from the coach.

Great teachers are always learning -- from everything and everyone. A teacher who is incapable of further learning, at any age and stage, is intellectually and ethically dead, at that point. Most great teachers learn more from their students than from "the ancient texts" or "the experts." Great students are those who have learned not simply their subject, but how their knowledge of their own field of study can enhance their study of other fields. A student who cannot teach what he has learned is a moron. He hasn't really learned anything. A teacher who does not understand that he constantly needs to study is equally a moron, because he is just resting on the laurels of his past knowledge.[/QUOTE]

Hmmmm...So just because you decide to teach martial art, you have to slow down your own development and allow students to surpass you? I agree a horrible teacher is one who's students learn nothing, but it takes two. If the student can't take what he learns and become as good or greater than his teacher, whats that saying? That the student is horrible or the teacher is horrible?
A student CANNOT learn his/her teachers physical attributes like speed, power, accuracy, flexibility, etc... all they can learn are the skills.
A good teacher can show their students the way, but its takes a good student to accually develope his own skills and attributes through rigorous training.
And if that student can eventually teach what he himself learned, then both, teacher and student have done a great job.
And I agree that student can teach the sifu alot about himself, but a teacher shouldn't just move aside and let his students pass him up.
Doesn't make the teacher horrible if the students can't beat him, know what I'm saying.

I agree with you. I never said and don't say, now, that the teacher should step aside, to ALLOW his student to overtake him. However, a good teacher will be able to impart skills to his student so that the student will, eventually, overtake the teacher. I don't mean just when the teacher is old and gray, but with sufficient training and practice, a good student MUST be able to overtake his teacher. You are absolutely correct in saying that effort and dedication is required on part of both the teacher and the student. A student will learn nothing, if he does not work to improve his skills himself. Simply sitting in front of the teacher will not make a good student better.

Given that the teacher is knowledgeable, dedicated, and communicates effectively, and the student is willing to pay attention, practice, and constantly strive for improvement, the student should overtake the teacher.

Dr. K

With all due respect to the man.

1-Bruce Lee was not Yip Mans #1 student, there were any number of students senior to Lee both before and after his tenure with him--and tougher too.

2-His "streetfighting" background was confined to fistfights he had as a boy and teen-ager.

3-The only known fight in the USA has multiple different points of view as to exactly what happned--I don't think even the witnesses stories even match

4-The words "humble" and Bruce Lee should not be in the same sentence--everyone who knew him has publically commented on his "attitude"--not more than any other "hollywood" type--but not the self-effaceing person you see either.

5-Just for the record, concerning his "willingness" to learn from other arts.
It annoys the heck out of me that Lee "borrowed" ideas, concepts and paraphases, even direct quotes--things which he took from others that are now ATTRIBUTED to him.

Example:

-His famous "be like water" statement was a pretty common term in many styles of Chinese martial arts--an observation found in Confucious, LaoTze and couple of schools of Japanese Swordsmanship--I think Funakoshi even said somehthing similar--well before Lee.

Bruce Lee was an outstanding martial artist who did much to bring attention to the arts.

But he was just a man--there is no evidence to conclude that he was a fighter "par-excellent"--mainly because he never seems to have actually fought anyone.

Its been said that the greatest foe of truth is not the delibrate lie but the myth.

I see more respect in viewing Lee for he was, a hard training, smart, disciplined,skilled guy whose efforts brought the MA into the public view.
Rather than mythologising (sp) the man as some kind of "super-fighter."

I see more respect in admiring (sp) the man rather than repeating his myth.

Well cxt, my brother, Bruce would kick your arse. That aside I'd say that as a minority cat growing up in 60s-70s America he was almost required to show bravado and cajones. Asian characters in cinema and on the tube were degraded and stereotyped. They still are. He may have been a spoiled brat, but a lot of the attitude was a result of the anger he felt towards this bigoted country. That's a fact.

I know he bit from Miyamoto Musashi, Takuan Soho and others. Believe me I know this better than you. Before then the only people who even had a clue about Asian philosophy were Asian Philosophy majors in college. He brought those concepts to the general public. He introduced the Judo, JJ and Japanese Karate lovers to the Chinese arts- where it all started. He even fought someone so he could teach the "guailo" Chuan Fa. He was a cool, hemp smoking idealist.

When the Lion's Den opened up their schools or when MMAs types talk about cross-training, they are showing how smart Bruce was for his modern way of training in the MAs. They are validating the journeyman's journey. Not everyone is exposed to all-around arts. Not everyone has the aptitude, resources or patience to do a real MA. Now they can make a patchwork quilt that will protect you in the same way a good one-piece one does.

Plus, money and fame are what it's all about, right? That's what America is- shallowness for money, and proving superficiality is all the depth you need.

Oh and for your gun comment in that other post. What if you can't get to a weapon? What if you're stole on the street. Whatcha' gonna do if ya' can't swang hands?

I thought it was a Gweilo or an Ang Moh, but anyway....

About Lee being superficial, he knew what he was doing. I am fairly sure that one of his higher up students asked wether he would make more realistic fight scenes, but he said they not exciting. He was right. I like the UFC but my friends reckoned it was as interesting as watching grass grow.

Dr. K

"Bruce Lee would kick your ass"

Of course he could--course he would have to actually rise from the dead to do it--which would be a much better trick than "kicking my ass."

What's your point?

The fact that Lee, while alive could have turned me into a grease spot has nothing to due with your way off base statements about Lee's status as "Yip Mans #1 student" Lees "streetingfight", his "humble" attitude, or many of his attributied quotes and ideas actuallly coming from other sources.

Lee was, in many ways, a very impressive guy. Someone that should be respected for what he accomplished.

Unfortunatly, for many the "Myth" overshadows the man and his real accomplishments.

I think thats a shame.

It's like anyone ELSE that dies at a young age -- their myth tends to overstate the person that they actually were. This often grows with time after the passing of the individual. Its definitely happened with Lee.

JKD isn't "about" Lee however. That's what most people don't understand.

-John

IT IS NOW CALLED

shotocunt
lol
lol

kyokushinkid_9 :

Listen kid, that's the second GENITAL referrence that you've made on this forum. I have line on you now and see what your whole thing is about here. I would just report you to the moderator, but I'm giving you a warning here to straighten up if you want to be a part of this forum.

You can either contribute to the talk here, or cheapen it as you have so far. If THAT is what you decide to do however, the moderator WILL be in touch with you.

-John

Bruce Lee was exceptional student and Yip Man's best student. But he wasnt a perfect martail artist and especially not humble. He published a best selling book that said "I could beat any man on the planet". Great example. But I do train in his fighting "ideas" as he called it.

I cannot believe my ears. Was Bruce Lee a figher? Let's take a moment to really analyze that question.

First off, I keep hearing the term "professional fighting record". What does it professional fighting record have to do with whether or not someone can really fight. Professional fights have rules, restrictions, rounds, tap outs, etc. You can't compare a sport to an all-out brawl.
Lee and others have stated that he has street fights. Bob Wall witness and noted that the other guy WAS VERY GOOD. Bob was a champ wouldn't he know good when he witnessed it? He said Lee mopped the floor with the guy. A well-known champion boxer (Shamba Mitchell) got his butt KICKED but a guy in the DC area in street fight. This is after he'd racked up tons of KO's in the ring. There are numerous instances where Pro's are beaten in street fights by ordinary people using real world fight tactics. A pro fighting record is worthless in a street brawl.

COMMENT BY JOE LEWIS, NOORIS AND OTHERS: Lee never physically sparred with these guys and it wasn't the point of the sessions anyway. I don't believe they would endorse a lame. I have read statements from Lewis that suggests Bruce was exceptional. Lewis couldn't judge him as a fighter because he didn't know to judge. But, he respected the man enough to take time out of his life train with and learn from him. If Lee were a lame, then why would Lewis or Norris waste their time? Bob Wall said he would not dare get in a ring with Bruce. Sammo Hung said the same thing and he has a reputation as a real fighter. You mean to tell me all those respected people who are legends in their own right are telling lies just to sustain the legend of Bruce Lee? What do they have to gain by doing that?

Not learning from a teacher you can beat: Learning and fighting are two different mediums. I've heard a few people state that they would not want to learn from someone they could beat. That goes to show the narrow mindedness of those individuals. A teacher is their to give you knowledge and expand your viewpoint. If you can beat him physically that does not mean that he doesn't have knowledge that can make you a better fighter. Beating him doesn't mean his technique is flawed. Issues like size, weight and strength differences. The teacher physical state at the time, etc. Cus could not beat Tyson in a fight, but Tyson would not have won without Cus's insights and wisdom. See the connection?

GENE LABELL: Labell supposedly subdued Lee. Good. I believe that Lee would have wanted that in order to learn from it. He and Labell were not enemies. In order to learn from a master you have to subject yourself to techniques of that system. If he doesn't how can he excell? There is no way Lee is going to grapple with a grappling master and win without first knowing the ins and outs of the system. When Ali was stepped in a ring to spar, he got knocked around by the other guy who knew the ropes already. When he learned it was a different story.

LEE AS AN INNOVATOR: Lee was an innovator. He was cross-training in the 60s. THE 60s!!!! Most people were still stuck in their perspective systems. He was already teaching freedom. Sure it had been written about but how many were ACTUALLY doing it and expanding on those earlier writings. Certainly not Lewis, Norris or any other known Pro fighter. This is WHY they gravitated to Lee. Because knowledge base was so much broader ANDDDD because he had taken the time to test techniques of one system against those of another and then combine and mix movements and stikes. They did not have this knowledge and wanted it, so they studied with the man who had it, LEE. Hendrix didn't invent guitar playing, nor did he invent the notion of doing it differently. However, he added his 2 cents and that inspired others to take a different path. Lee did the same thing.

OTHER GUYS IN LEE'S TIME WHO WERE AS GOOD AS HIM: One guy, the individual who uses the word "mate" a lot, says he has a list of fighters who would KO lee.

Stop talking and post that list. Then state why these guys would KO Lee.

Certainly there were others who were equal to him in some respects. But you must consider the total package. Knowledge, work ethic, innovative thought, creativity, physical ability, mental attitude, focus, etc. Lee had all of these in abundance. That sets him apart from others of his day.

This guy said people TODAY have surpassed Lee. I would hope so. We are a species of continual evolution. If anything were stagnated, we'd be driving horse buggies around still. Lee's been dead 30 years so yes some modern martial artist may have surpassed him, but I dare you to name one who wasn't at least slightly influenced by his insights.

Give the man is credit. He wasn't just a run of the mill martial artist, he was special. Now that's not saying he was the best, but he was special.

I also wonder how much truth is behind the Legend that is Bruce Lee's fighting abilities. The only proof that I ever find to keep me as a die hard Bruce Lee fan is the fact that he is the ONLY person I've ever seen or heard of to knock a man off his feet with a one inch punch. That cant be disputed. The second thing is the pictures that I always see of him training and his partner thats holding a kicking bag goes flying accross the room.

Take this into consideration when pondering whethere Bruce Lee was the Truth or just hollywood glamour.

Okie

Actually MANY people have duplicated the famous "one inch" punch.

Thats true. The "one inch punch" is no longer a secret. The cats out of the bag. Well, been out I should say.
There are books out that show the technique involved. Hell, everybody should already know the mechanics of it by now. Its just a gimick really.

A common misconception is that the punch is a push. Not true. While many can attempt the 1"Punch and can push someone down, the real technique is relaxing and totally concentrating all your energy into an accual punch.

What were we talking about anyway....??

Oh yes, I remember now. This thread as been absolutly run into the ground.

R.I.P

[This message has been edited by DragonFire1134 (edited 07-06-2004).]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cxt:
Okie
QUOTE]

Aw, now Im gettin ripped on by someone from Dorathy's home state.... lol

Just wanted to see this one go over 100.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bruce Lee:
OK there I would have to disagree with you. If there were so many people who could KO him quickly then where were they when he had his world wide challange where he would fight ANYONE, anywhere, under any rule. Do you see my point. He was willing to fight anyone, and if he really wasn't confident thet he could win, why would he put up that kind of challange.(Just a note - the person who fought him lost within 3 minutes. He was a master of martial arts and he ran away from Bruce.Bruce cought him though [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gif[/IMG] )

Nobody is saying that Bruce was some kind of god, he was just a REALLY good martial artist. He is also not invincible, but I can say with confidence that if Bruce were to fight someone his size, he would win. [/QUOTE]

What are you talking about.When the Gracies(creators of BJJ) challenged Bruce Lee, he refused to fight any of them.Even though Lee claimed to have grappleing experiance and that he could defeat the Gracies art he would never accept their challenge.

People like Rickson Gracie scared him. You know.. with his actually RECORDED 400 fights with 0 loses.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JujitsuMan:
People like Rickson Gracie scared him. You know.. with his actually RECORDED 400 fights with 0 loses.[/QUOTE]

Got proof?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DragonFire1134:
Got proof?[/QUOTE]

Well for one it is on the families official website www.gracie.com , but if you dont believe it you could do some research of your own and I garuntee you will find these results.

[IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

I have found very little of Lee's teachings that were not previously written in works like: A Book of Five Rings, Art of War, and Tao Teh Ching. This is just what I have found, and I am making no accusations so you JKD guys try to pull some punches when you come in for the counter attack. Let me know what you all have found in your studies.

it doesnt matter if bruce lee was a fighter or not, the thing that is important is that he can fight extremelllyyy well

-cheers

He CAN???

Don't talk to me about Rickson Gracie. He has YET to fight any noted fighters in any MMA division.

Those 400 wins? WHo were they against?

No dnt post things like this it is against my belifs I find JKD is a very skilled and disaplined sport or as i say self defence class. Also all kinds of kung fu are very well planned

wha r u tlking about this is against my beliefs I train alot 3hours aday after school and I find the combination of Jkd an Tai Chi Chun an Tai Kickboxing is a very rewarding feature of my life Bruce Lee was a great fighter an any1 can only wish he was that good leave him alone.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Shokhan-Metri:
Don't talk to me about Rickson Gracie. He has YET to fight any noted fighters in any MMA division.

Those 400 wins? WHo were they against? [/QUOTE]

Like I said do your research if you really want to know, and he did defeat many great fighters of his time.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JujitsuMan:
Like I said do your research if you really want to know, and he did defeat many great fighters of his time.[/QUOTE]Oh yeah,WHat were there names? PS Just admit it, You've no proof. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG]

I think Bruce could have beat any of the gracies simply because he trained in more than one range of fighting. You cant be just a grappler and hope to win every fight.

First of all the Gracies aren't now and never were invincible. They beat alot of people until other fighters started to train on the ground , then slowly but surely, the name Gracie is just another name.

Sakuraba (THE GRACIE KILLER), proved that creative fighting technique can destroy them. How many of them did he whip?

When will this thread DIE???!


-John

Rickson won a lot of those 450 matches just rolling around with people in gyms, or like someone above said, mere single-martial arts competition. All-Jiu Jitsu, all blah blah. It's not like he went into the octagon or ring 450 times against equal or greater opposition, and destroyed them all. The only real MMA fights on his record are jokes. He's got a win over Funaki in Pancrase, but that was well after his prime. He beat the butt-scooter Takada a few times - big deal. I'll never understand the passion for Rickson Gracie. It's similar for Tito Ortiz, but he even if you don't like I can see why you think he's invincible. Rickson, I just don't know.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JKogas:
Question EVERYTHING!


-John[/QUOTE]

James DeMile
Interview Conducted By Paul J. Bax

James DeMile was one of Bruce Lee's inner circle of students while he lived in Seattle. As a Bruce Lee historian, I have read countless interviews with Mr. DeMile that have covered topics such as how he met Bruce Lee and their many adventures together. In this interview, I am revisiting some of Mr. DeMile's older talks about Bruce Lee in hope of clarifying a few issues that have been on my mind and hopefully on the minds of other Bruce Lee fans over the last few years.

....

PB: Do you feel Bruce Lee ever found happiness?
JD: My personal opinion, No. The more famous he became the more he closed the world around himself. He became very paranoid. The people I spoke too who were around Bruce just before he died said he was becoming kind of weird. Distrustful, forgetful and was losing weight. There was not any end to his inner search for the answers to who, what and why he existed. Becoming the best fighter was only a stop over on a longer journey that could not be reached. He wanted to be the best Asian actor, director, producer and....and....and....

PB: You once mentioned Joe Lewis in regard to a conversation you had with Dan Inosanto in which Danny claimed that during a workout session with Bruce Lee that Lewis "could not do anything." Can you expound on this?
JD: It is hard to recall the exact conversations that took place many years ago. But this was the gist of the talk. Danny had seen Bruce Spar with Joe and Chuck Norris and said he would neutralize everything they tried. His ability to close, trap and shut down any attack was amazing. I did not doubt this since I had had personal experience with his skills. Bruce was a street fighter, and they were tournament players. There is a definite difference between the two. I have always been more than happy to explain the differences to those who think that winning trophies and smashing heads is the same thing.

PB: In another interview, you once said Lee "could have beaten anyone regardless of size and strength." With martial artists reaching new levels in training, do you think Lee would have the same superiority over today's fighters as he did back when you knew him?
JD: Yes. The reason is what he did and how he did it. Today’s fighter is bigger and stronger, yet really does much of the same thing when fighting. It is difficult to explain in writing, but easy when doing it in person. A large part of the problem in communicating Bruce’s skills is that most people do not understand what a street fight is. It is not a tournament, not UFC or K1 or the Sabaki challenge. It is Neanderthal. It is no quarter and the only goal is to really hurt or kill the opponent. It is stupid and mindless, yet happens everyday. Bruce had two levels of action: two seconds or less or play. Meaning the fight was over in a blink or he played cat and mouse because he had no respect for the person’s skills. I do not care how strong you are, what rank you are, what style you are, if you cannot see it coming you cannot stop it. If, at the other end of that invisible movement was the floating punch, then it was over before it began.

PB: Robert Yeung, a Wing Chun instructor, once provided you with insight into the art. Tell us about Mr. Yeung. Did he provide insight into Lee's art of Wing Chun that Lee possibly neglected to share?
JD: Robert Yeung was a Wing Chun purist. He lived and breathed Wing Chun. He was the first one in line to defend the honor of Wing Chun. He came to visit me, where I was teaching in Honolulu, to find out who this guy was that said he was teaching wing Chun. He really came to challenge me. He watched my class and approached me afterward and asked me what I was teaching. I said "Wing Chun". Without a smile he said "No your not". Surprised, I asked why not. He said, "You are using the terms of Wing Chun, but not doing the techniques correctly. I found this an interesting statement since I had never known anyone but Bruce to practice Wing Chun. He told me he had trained in Yip Man's school in Hong Kong. At this point I think Robert became aware that I meant no disrespect, but was just ignorant as to what Wing Chun was. We sat down and I explained my training with Bruce and his use of the terms in our training. Robert explained that Bruce's Wing Chun training was limited since he only trained for three years. Although very skilled in general applications he felt Bruce lacked insight into the true art of Wing Chun. Bruce was not really interested in Wing Chun; he was only interested in fighting. Robert felt this is why Bruce did things so different. He was very focused and only gleaned out the techniques and concepts that he felt had value for him. Bruce's later teaching in America reflected this thought, since Bruce always related to fighting when evaluating a technique or concept. He would teach a technique for a month a suddenly drop it in favor of something else. Robert felt Bruce deserved a lot of credit for his creative insight to the art of fighting, however, Robert was only interested in the art of Wing Chun and assumed that Bruce used Wing Chun as a springboard or starting point for his own discoveries.

PB: Bruce returned from his first trip from HK and it is said he was devastated because his progress was "zip." After that you stated he started on a path to revolutionize the martial arts.
JD: A tricky thought here. His progress was zip because he was still doing what they were doing, only they had more years of training than he had and therefore he was less skilled. He finally realized he would never catch up with them, since they were also continuing to train. The answer was to change and discover ways to beat what they were doing. This is when he entered his conceptual phase.

PB: Did you ever meet Lee's Hong Kong classmates/instructors such as William Cheung, Hawkins Cheung and Wong Shueng Leung and if so, how did their skills compare to Bruce Lee?
JD: I never met any of the three, however I know people who knew them well. William Chung cannot be compared to the Bruce Lee we all knew. William’s memory of Bruce was the young punk kid who looked up to him. Yet from everything I have seen and heard, William stayed the same, whereas Bruce evolved dramatically. I have seen videos of William and was not impressed with his skill and application.

PB: It seems every era of Lee's students seem to think he was at a point of evolution over the last. But for someone like myself, who has read countless interviews over the years, it seems Bruce already had a lot his advanced methods while in Seattle. Your thoughts?
JD: Bruce evolved all through his short life. However, I believe, in those first few years, Bruce discovered his personal answers to be the best fighter. Once discovered, he filed them away and began his quest to create the best martial arts system. His belief that a fight should not take over two seconds was basic to his discoveries. The longer the fight, the more chance for luck to come into play. Bruce wanted to control the outcome, not hope that he was going to be lucky. One of the most important concepts that Bruce shared with me was that you could become a master of a few techniques, but never a lot. He felt that if you could define the elements of a fight and design techniques to directly overwhelm them, then you were developing the ultimate system. If the total list of techniques did not exceed ten, then becoming a master of them was very realistic. I have followed this thought, both in my teaching (the tool pouch mentality) and in my own training. I am a good teacher and know my material well, but my students often become better than me in many elements of Wing Chun Do. But, for my own purposes, I know less than 10 techniques that I have total confidence will wipe out anyone I should have to fight. Anyone. Not bragging, just confident. In my demonstrations I try and share this concept so people will have some insight as to why Bruce was so effective in his survival skills.

PB: Bruce used to train quite a bit with firearms. Can you expound on this.
JD: Bruce liked to fire guns. He and Leroy Garcia used to do a lot of shooting. However, I do not believe Bruce "trained" with guns.

PB: Explain Lee's "spring load" concept.
JD: A critical element of Bruce’s ability to trap and control an opponent. His "spring load" was like a bad smell you could not get rid of. Once he touched you, no matter how you twisted or turned you could not get away from him. The application of his load was to put you into a weak position or angle, keep you there, while he thumped on your head.


PB: Bruce Lee once told you, "Why should I teach someone to beat me?" This was while he was still in Seattle, correct? Please explain.
JD: A very, very important statement and easily understood by anyone who wanted to be the best, developed a way to achieve it and then realized that if you showed it to someone, they would improve on it, and then beat you. The reason I broke away from Bruce's classes in Jun Fan was that he left out pieces of the puzzle that made everything work. He de-emphasized the centerline, closed Bi-jong and spring energy. He continued this way of teaching on into JKD. Bruce could make Jun Fan and JKD work, because he had the basics. In all the years I have known people who trained in anything Bruce taught in his later periods, I have never known them to use the basic concepts as Bruce applied them. This includes Danny Inosanto. I do not mean this in a negative way, only that I feel Bruce cheated a lot of people by leaving out important details he used himself.

PB: You once stated in an article that, "Bruce never taught the applied concept of the surge punch because he felt to do so would invite someone to beat him." Has this punch become more widely taught in recent years?
JD: You get back to the two second or less concept. Bruce knew that if you had a single punch that would bring down anyone, then it could be used against him. The punch seems to be more exposed; yet I find the application is still missing. Being able to hit hard and being able to hit your target are two different things.

PB: Lee once told you, "If a person learns my punching and closing techniques that's all they need to know. Along with the element of surprise, you can just leap in like a bolt of lightening and blow anyone away regardless of his rank or style." In today's world of grappling related arts, do you feel Lee could still pull off his advanced punching techniques?
JD: Without a doubt. You must remember that most grappling arts are willing to leap in and take a punch in order to take the opponent down. In most cases this can work. Bruce was like a shadow that always seemed to disappear, no matter how fast you attacked. He would hit you at angles. He could dislocate your jaw, crush your temple, crack your clavicle or spit a muscle, all in less than a blink. While you were rushing, all protected, he would redirect your energy, spring load your awkward position, then fire at any number of targets.

PB: Can you expound more on the hypnosis you taught Lee and how he combined that with meditation?
JD: Bruce did not like the term hypnosis, but felt that it was a much faster way to access the subconscious than conventional meditation. Hypnosis and meditation both have the same intent. To travel within, and use the inner mental potentials to accelerate training. My input was to teach him self-hypnosis and how to develop suggestions in the areas he was concerned.

.....

PB: I am confused as to Lee's sharing of how to use the one-inch punch. Many claim to have been taught the punch yet you once said he only taught it to you. Are you saying you are the only person to your knowledge that he taught the punch to in Seattle, including Glover and Kimura?
JD: I do not want to beat on my own drum, but Bruce did not teach me the one-inch punch. It was he and I that developed it. That is why I know so many details that make the punch work. In my apartment, we went over and over ways to hit at close range. Robert Yeung said Wing Chun had a long range floating punch, but nothing at one or two inches. Bruce knew of the Wing Chun punch but wanted something that would fit into his close-in trapping techniques. Since I had been a boxer we experimented with the punching action and then explored different ways to add power. They were two separate elements. The punching action was actually the easy part; it was how to generate the explosive power at an inch or less. Once we accomplished a marriage between the two, Bruce insisted I tell know one. This included Jesse and everyone else in the early group. It was no big deal to me. Jesse spent a lot of private time with Bruce and I am sure knows things the rest of us don't. I honestly forgot about the punch for many years. I never heard anything from Jun Fan or JKD regarding the punch. Only years later, in the early 70's, did I hear it mentioned. Bob Wall was on TV in Honolulu talking about being in a recent movie with Bruce. He said that Bruce showed him this punch and then he went on to demonstrate it. I was totally blown away. I called the station and asked Bob to stop by. He did and I asked him to demonstrate the punch. He hit me. I told him to hit me again, only as hard as he could. It rocked me, but I did not feel the internal roll of energy that I knew was part of the punch. Bob asked me to hit him. I put a phone book to his chest and knocked him across my club and into a wall. He was stunned. He said, "That was unbelievable, you should write a book on that." And that is how the "Bruce Lee One and Three Inch" Power Punch book originated. Over the years I have run across many instructors who profess to know the punch and have never felt one who had the internal reactions of the original punch. I have taught it to thousands of people, so there has to be a lot of people who can do it.

PB: Recently, THE JUN FAN JEET KUNE DO NUCLEUS dissolved, as did THE JKD SOCIETY over a decade ago. Do you feel it is a lost cause for Lee's students to try and organize an association to disseminate his teachings?
JD: Yes. There is not one voice, but many, and yet none of these know what Bruce really meant in his thoughts and teachings.

PB: Jesse Glover's brother, Mike Lee, has been rumored to be one of Lee's most gifted students. Did you know Mike and would you agree with the assessment regarding his abilities?
JD: Mike was very good. I remember him as being very young and into running when I trained with Bruce. I know his brother Jesse worked with him a lot. I am unaware of just how much Bruce worked with Mike, so I cannot really make an assessment of him.
PB: There has been a lingering rumor that you and Bruce had a falling out in your friendship at one time. Is this true and if so please explain the circumstances and if you two remained friends after he left for Oakland.
JD: It was not a rumor. It was true. It was my fault. After I broke away from regular classes I would go down and visit Bruce in his underground club on King Street. After one of his classes I was talking to some of the students and they asked why I had stopped training. I mentioned that I felt Bruce was leaving out important pieces of what made things work. Bruce heard about my comments and when I visited again confronted me, very uptight, and asked why I said what I did. I told him and he said I had no right to make comments to his class. I agreed and apologized. He was slapping some gloves into his other palm and suggested I was challenging him. He was very upset and seemed to be pushing for a fight. I knew I was on very dangerous ground. To fight Bruce when he was calm was insanity, but to do it when he was mad was to invite sudden death. The only amusing memory of the event was that in that period of my life I carried a gun. I had it in my coat pocket and my finger was on the trigger. I calmly thought to myself that if he leaped at me I was going to blow a hole in him. As it was I apologized again, turned and walked out. That was the last time I spoke to Bruce. I have to be honest. Jesse was his friend. Taky was his friend. I was a training part a dummy. I knew Bruce for a few years, went to school with him, ate with him, went to the movies with him and hung out with him and the others. Our common interest was fighting. My personal evaluation of him will stay personal. But, as a fighter, he was the best.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by pete:
James DeMile
Interview Conducted By Paul J. Bax

James DeMile was one of Bruce Lee's inner circle of students while he lived in Seattle. As a Bruce Lee historian, I have read countless interviews with Mr. DeMile that have covered topics such as how he met Bruce Lee and their many adventures together. In this interview, I am revisiting some of Mr. DeMile's older talks about Bruce Lee in hope of clarifying a few issues that have been on my mind and hopefully on the minds of other Bruce Lee fans over the last few years.

....

PB: Do you feel Bruce Lee ever found happiness?
JD: My personal opinion, No. The more famous he became the more he closed the world around himself. He became very paranoid. The people I spoke too who were around Bruce just before he died said he was becoming kind of weird. Distrustful, forgetful and was losing weight. There was not any end to his inner search for the answers to who, what and why he existed. Becoming the best fighter was only a stop over on a longer journey that could not be reached. He wanted to be the best Asian actor, director, producer and....and....and....

PB: You once mentioned Joe Lewis in regard to a conversation you had with Dan Inosanto in which Danny claimed that during a workout session with Bruce Lee that Lewis "could not do anything." Can you expound on this?
JD: It is hard to recall the exact conversations that took place many years ago. But this was the gist of the talk. Danny had seen Bruce Spar with Joe and Chuck Norris and said he would neutralize everything they tried. His ability to close, trap and shut down any attack was amazing. I did not doubt this since I had had personal experience with his skills. Bruce was a street fighter, and they were tournament players. There is a definite difference between the two. I have always been more than happy to explain the differences to those who think that winning trophies and smashing heads is the same thing.

PB: In another interview, you once said Lee "could have beaten anyone regardless of size and strength." With martial artists reaching new levels in training, do you think Lee would have the same superiority over today's fighters as he did back when you knew him?
JD: Yes. The reason is what he did and how he did it. Today’s fighter is bigger and stronger, yet really does much of the same thing when fighting. It is difficult to explain in writing, but easy when doing it in person. A large part of the problem in communicating Bruce’s skills is that most people do not understand what a street fight is. It is not a tournament, not UFC or K1 or the Sabaki challenge. It is Neanderthal. It is no quarter and the only goal is to really hurt or kill the opponent. It is stupid and mindless, yet happens everyday. Bruce had two levels of action: two seconds or less or play. Meaning the fight was over in a blink or he played cat and mouse because he had no respect for the person’s skills. I do not care how strong you are, what rank you are, what style you are, if you cannot see it coming you cannot stop it. If, at the other end of that invisible movement was the floating punch, then it was over before it began.

PB: Robert Yeung, a Wing Chun instructor, once provided you with insight into the art. Tell us about Mr. Yeung. Did he provide insight into Lee's art of Wing Chun that Lee possibly neglected to share?
JD: Robert Yeung was a Wing Chun purist. He lived and breathed Wing Chun. He was the first one in line to defend the honor of Wing Chun. He came to visit me, where I was teaching in Honolulu, to find out who this guy was that said he was teaching wing Chun. He really came to challenge me. He watched my class and approached me afterward and asked me what I was teaching. I said "Wing Chun". Without a smile he said "No your not". Surprised, I asked why not. He said, "You are using the terms of Wing Chun, but not doing the techniques correctly. I found this an interesting statement since I had never known anyone but Bruce to practice Wing Chun. He told me he had trained in Yip Man's school in Hong Kong. At this point I think Robert became aware that I meant no disrespect, but was just ignorant as to what Wing Chun was. We sat down and I explained my training with Bruce and his use of the terms in our training. Robert explained that Bruce's Wing Chun training was limited since he only trained for three years. Although very skilled in general applications he felt Bruce lacked insight into the true art of Wing Chun. Bruce was not really interested in Wing Chun; he was only interested in fighting. Robert felt this is why Bruce did things so different. He was very focused and only gleaned out the techniques and concepts that he felt had value for him. Bruce's later teaching in America reflected this thought, since Bruce always related to fighting when evaluating a technique or concept. He would teach a technique for a month a suddenly drop it in favor of something else. Robert felt Bruce deserved a lot of credit for his creative insight to the art of fighting, however, Robert was only interested in the art of Wing Chun and assumed that Bruce used Wing Chun as a springboard or starting point for his own discoveries.

PB: Bruce returned from his first trip from HK and it is said he was devastated because his progress was "zip." After that you stated he started on a path to revolutionize the martial arts.
JD: A tricky thought here. His progress was zip because he was still doing what they were doing, only they had more years of training than he had and therefore he was less skilled. He finally realized he would never catch up with them, since they were also continuing to train. The answer was to change and discover ways to beat what they were doing. This is when he entered his conceptual phase.

PB: Did you ever meet Lee's Hong Kong classmates/instructors such as William Cheung, Hawkins Cheung and Wong Shueng Leung and if so, how did their skills compare to Bruce Lee?
JD: I never met any of the three, however I know people who knew them well. William Chung cannot be compared to the Bruce Lee we all knew. William’s memory of Bruce was the young punk kid who looked up to him. Yet from everything I have seen and heard, William stayed the same, whereas Bruce evolved dramatically. I have seen videos of William and was not impressed with his skill and application.

PB: It seems every era of Lee's students seem to think he was at a point of evolution over the last. But for someone like myself, who has read countless interviews over the years, it seems Bruce already had a lot his advanced methods while in Seattle. Your thoughts?
JD: Bruce evolved all through his short life. However, I believe, in those first few years, Bruce discovered his personal answers to be the best fighter. Once discovered, he filed them away and began his quest to create the best martial arts system. His belief that a fight should not take over two seconds was basic to his discoveries. The longer the fight, the more chance for luck to come into play. Bruce wanted to control the outcome, not hope that he was going to be lucky. One of the most important concepts that Bruce shared with me was that you could become a master of a few techniques, but never a lot. He felt that if you could define the elements of a fight and design techniques to directly overwhelm them, then you were developing the ultimate system. If the total list of techniques did not exceed ten, then becoming a master of them was very realistic. I have followed this thought, both in my teaching (the tool pouch mentality) and in my own training. I am a good teacher and know my material well, but my students often become better than me in many elements of Wing Chun Do. But, for my own purposes, I know less than 10 techniques that I have total confidence will wipe out anyone I should have to fight. Anyone. Not bragging, just confident. In my demonstrations I try and share this concept so people will have some insight as to why Bruce was so effective in his survival skills.

PB: Bruce used to train quite a bit with firearms. Can you expound on this.
JD: Bruce liked to fire guns. He and Leroy Garcia used to do a lot of shooting. However, I do not believe Bruce "trained" with guns.

PB: Explain Lee's "spring load" concept.
JD: A critical element of Bruce’s ability to trap and control an opponent. His "spring load" was like a bad smell you could not get rid of. Once he touched you, no matter how you twisted or turned you could not get away from him. The application of his load was to put you into a weak position or angle, keep you there, while he thumped on your head.


PB: Bruce Lee once told you, "Why should I teach someone to beat me?" This was while he was still in Seattle, correct? Please explain.
JD: A very, very important statement and easily understood by anyone who wanted to be the best, developed a way to achieve it and then realized that if you showed it to someone, they would improve on it, and then beat you. The reason I broke away from Bruce's classes in Jun Fan was that he left out pieces of the puzzle that made everything work. He de-emphasized the centerline, closed Bi-jong and spring energy. He continued this way of teaching on into JKD. Bruce could make Jun Fan and JKD work, because he had the basics. In all the years I have known people who trained in anything Bruce taught in his later periods, I have never known them to use the basic concepts as Bruce applied them. This includes Danny Inosanto. I do not mean this in a negative way, only that I feel Bruce cheated a lot of people by leaving out important details he used himself.

PB: You once stated in an article that, "Bruce never taught the applied concept of the surge punch because he felt to do so would invite someone to beat him." Has this punch become more widely taught in recent years?
JD: You get back to the two second or less concept. Bruce knew that if you had a single punch that would bring down anyone, then it could be used against him. The punch seems to be more exposed; yet I find the application is still missing. Being able to hit hard and being able to hit your target are two different things.

PB: Lee once told you, "If a person learns my punching and closing techniques that's all they need to know. Along with the element of surprise, you can just leap in like a bolt of lightening and blow anyone away regardless of his rank or style." In today's world of grappling related arts, do you feel Lee could still pull off his advanced punching techniques?
JD: Without a doubt. You must remember that most grappling arts are willing to leap in and take a punch in order to take the opponent down. In most cases this can work. Bruce was like a shadow that always seemed to disappear, no matter how fast you attacked. He would hit you at angles. He could dislocate your jaw, crush your temple, crack your clavicle or spit a muscle, all in less than a blink. While you were rushing, all protected, he would redirect your energy, spring load your awkward position, then fire at any number of targets.

PB: Can you expound more on the hypnosis you taught Lee and how he combined that with meditation?
JD: Bruce did not like the term hypnosis, but felt that it was a much faster way to access the subconscious than conventional meditation. Hypnosis and meditation both have the same intent. To travel within, and use the inner mental potentials to accelerate training. My input was to teach him self-hypnosis and how to develop suggestions in the areas he was concerned.

.....

PB: I am confused as to Lee's sharing of how to use the one-inch punch. Many claim to have been taught the punch yet you once said he only taught it to you. Are you saying you are the only person to your knowledge that he taught the punch to in Seattle, including Glover and Kimura?
JD: I do not want to beat on my own drum, but Bruce did not teach me the one-inch punch. It was he and I that developed it. That is why I know so many details that make the punch work. In my apartment, we went over and over ways to hit at close range. Robert Yeung said Wing Chun had a long range floating punch, but nothing at one or two inches. Bruce knew of the Wing Chun punch but wanted something that would fit into his close-in trapping techniques. Since I had been a boxer we experimented with the punching action and then explored different ways to add power. They were two separate elements. The punching action was actually the easy part; it was how to generate the explosive power at an inch or less. Once we accomplished a marriage between the two, Bruce insisted I tell know one. This included Jesse and everyone else in the early group. It was no big deal to me. Jesse spent a lot of private time with Bruce and I am sure knows things the rest of us don't. I honestly forgot about the punch for many years. I never heard anything from Jun Fan or JKD regarding the punch. Only years later, in the early 70's, did I hear it mentioned. Bob Wall was on TV in Honolulu talking about being in a recent movie with Bruce. He said that Bruce showed him this punch and then he went on to demonstrate it. I was totally blown away. I called the station and asked Bob to stop by. He did and I asked him to demonstrate the punch. He hit me. I told him to hit me again, only as hard as he could. It rocked me, but I did not feel the internal roll of energy that I knew was part of the punch. Bob asked me to hit him. I put a phone book to his chest and knocked him across my club and into a wall. He was stunned. He said, "That was unbelievable, you should write a book on that." And that is how the "Bruce Lee One and Three Inch" Power Punch book originated. Over the years I have run across many instructors who profess to know the punch and have never felt one who had the internal reactions of the original punch. I have taught it to thousands of people, so there has to be a lot of people who can do it.

PB: Recently, THE JUN FAN JEET KUNE DO NUCLEUS dissolved, as did THE JKD SOCIETY over a decade ago. Do you feel it is a lost cause for Lee's students to try and organize an association to disseminate his teachings?
JD: Yes. There is not one voice, but many, and yet none of these know what Bruce really meant in his thoughts and teachings.

PB: Jesse Glover's brother, Mike Lee, has been rumored to be one of Lee's most gifted students. Did you know Mike and would you agree with the assessment regarding his abilities?
JD: Mike was very good. I remember him as being very young and into running when I trained with Bruce. I know his brother Jesse worked with him a lot. I am unaware of just how much Bruce worked with Mike, so I cannot really make an assessment of him.
PB: There has been a lingering rumor that you and Bruce had a falling out in your friendship at one time. Is this true and if so please explain the circumstances and if you two remained friends after he left for Oakland.
JD: It was not a rumor. It was true. It was my fault. After I broke away from regular classes I would go down and visit Bruce in his underground club on King Street. After one of his classes I was talking to some of the students and they asked why I had stopped training. I mentioned that I felt Bruce was leaving out important pieces of what made things work. Bruce heard about my comments and when I visited again confronted me, very uptight, and asked why I said what I did. I told him and he said I had no right to make comments to his class. I agreed and apologized. He was slapping some gloves into his other palm and suggested I was challenging him. He was very upset and seemed to be pushing for a fight. I knew I was on very dangerous ground. To fight Bruce when he was calm was insanity, but to do it when he was mad was to invite sudden death. The only amusing memory of the event was that in that period of my life I carried a gun. I had it in my coat pocket and my finger was on the trigger. I calmly thought to myself that if he leaped at me I was going to blow a hole in him. As it was I apologized again, turned and walked out. That was the last time I spoke to Bruce. I have to be honest. Jesse was his friend. Taky was his friend. I was a training part a dummy. I knew Bruce for a few years, went to school with him, ate with him, went to the movies with him and hung out with him and the others. Our common interest was fighting. My personal evaluation of him will stay personal. But, as a fighter, he was the best.

[/QUOTE]

Did bruce lee ever fight in the ring, i heard he may have fought some full contact matches in hong kong, late 60's or in 1970. Cant remember the exaxt details now.
Anyone heard this?

White

When Lee was training in Hong Kong he was a child.

No older than mid teens when his "street fights" took place.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by whitelotusfist:
Did bruce lee ever fight in the ring, i heard he may have fought some full contact matches in hong kong, late 60's or in 1970. Cant remember the exaxt details now.
Anyone heard this?

[/QUOTE]

He never fought in the ring. He does have some full contact fights under his belt though, as told from those who witneseed them. Now when he was younger and mixed up with gangs they used to get on hong kong rooftops and go all out, with certain rules in place of course. This was before he came to america, though...I'd say about 1940's--1950's. They were just kids then.

did he ever enter any semi contact or points sparring comps?
Cheers WLF

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chen Zen:
Exactly my point. And for the record, no I would not train under someone I can beat. If I can beat you its because your technique is flawed and I do not intend to add flawed technique to my training regimen.[/QUOTE]

Chen, this is surpisingly one demensional thinking coming from you. What if the reason you are able to "beat" me is simply because I am aging? There is a paradox here. Do you think that a 17 year old Bruce Lee thought the same about the elderly Yip Man? There is a point, and this is inescapable for each of us, that our insights and understanding begins to eclipse our physical ability.

- KiDoHae [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/cool.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by whitelotusfist:
did he ever enter any semi contact or points sparring comps?
Cheers WLF[/QUOTE]

No and no.

This is all irrelevant considering that Bruce Lee is no longer among the living.
Who cares whether or not he could or could not fight it doesn't apply to us.
We can't prove anything anyway. Who nows who he fought, like everyone has said a bunch of times theres no record of it, I mean I read that he beat the crap out of chuck Norris but does that make it true? No, so who really cares.

I never heard that he beat chuck Norris but chuck norris has said that they used to spar quite regularly, the validity of this claim, who knows. Bruce Lee was a philosopher who raised some good points about body mechanics, training, conditioning, and stealing from other styles. He had some good ideas. He's not alive to teach his fighting style to anyone anymore so what's the difference. If you take jeet kune do or Jun Fan you are learning someone elses interpretation of what Bruce Lee intended anyway. The same as any martial art. What matters is how good is your teacher, and how hard do you train. At present I train with someone that I may or may not be able to beat, but everyday he teaches me something that I find valuable to my style, not his style, mine. Steal as many candies as you can children and then someday you may find a box!

quote :its extremely rare, be good at fighting without fighting.


just because its rare doesnt mean it wont happen people werent supposed to be as smart as eignenstien but he was real beasides M.A. isnt for fighting you inbred hicks its a frame of mind like when you go to boot camp they tear you down phisycly and emotionally and basicly rebuild you from the ground up so hardwork+hard thought= what intellegent people call a higher state of thinking so you dont even have to fight...........beasides JKD was made to adapt in any fighting situation like water in a glass the water addapts to the glass not the oter way around.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ghosteo4:
quote :its extremely rare, be good at fighting without fighting.


just because its rare doesnt mean it wont happen people werent supposed to be as smart as eignenstien but he was real beasides M.A. isnt for fighting you inbred hicks its a frame of mind like when you go to boot camp they tear you down phisycly and emotionally and basicly rebuild you from the ground up so hardwork+hard thought= what intellegent people call a higher state of thinking so you dont even have to fight...........beasides JKD was made to adapt in any fighting situation like water in a glass the water addapts to the glass not the oter way around.[/QUOTE]

Martial Arts isnt for fighting you inbred hicks? lol. Ok just like learning alanguage isnt for speaking...

...what crap are you on about? Martial Arts was created by people to defend themselves and attack! I mean Whenever someone throws a punch to another human does that mean they are fighting.

Frame of mind. Ok if thats why you do Martial Arts then good for you. Maybe you should take up knitting!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by KiDoHae:
Chen, this is surpisingly one demensional thinking coming from you. What if the reason you are able to "beat" me is simply because I am aging? There is a paradox here. Do you think that a 17 year old Bruce Lee thought the same about the elderly Yip Man? There is a point, and this is inescapable for each of us, that our insights and understanding begins to eclipse our physical ability.

- KiDoHae [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/cool.gif[/IMG]

[/QUOTE]

An old post that I have grown beyond. However, Let me say this: If I walk into a dojo and there is an instructor around my age and physical health, and I beat him easily, how could I not blame his technique? Be it his footwork, timing, striking or defense, its all technical ability. Sure I have an avantage over a senior martial artist in my strength but he has an advantage in skill. or should. I believe that skill overrides power. Power without proper skill is nothing, whereas skill alone can mean everything.

Besides that I have grown beyond the need for instruction, as I do not believe in one WAY. There is no complete system so why have an instructor who would teach me something incomplete? Thats not to say that I wont spend a little time with skilled practitioners to learn certain aspects of fighting that I feel are a good contribution to my own, but this amount of time doesnt constitute me being called their "Student".

Martial arts are not for fighting, they are for ending conflict. If you think that martial arts are for fighting then you haven't learned any good stuff. The term martial art means warlike practise. War is about killing, ending a conflict as quickly as possible, while allowing as little damage to be done to yourself as possible. Fighting is for suckers.

First of all, how many of you have fighting records. I don't mean memorys of a street fight or sport karate or tae kwon do tag macth point tournoments. I mean a real fight record. Some of you say if you walk into a dojo and beat the instructor then he can not teach you anything. This kind of thinking is stupid. The marital arts is not about competition. According to Bruce Lee himself it is about expressing the human body. It is about truley expressing yourself with out the limitaions of other peoples ideas. Not about competition. Bruce believed that matial arts was a way of life, but should he have to use his art, he was determinded to win. As for wether he was the best I don't know. As for the fact that he could use his skills in a reality situation. I believe so.
He trained harded than any man I have ever met and got to places in martial arts that few people have reached before. As far as fight records go, alot of very talented martial artist don't have their every fight in a book somewhere. I do know that anyone that can spar with Chuck Norris and still be good enogh to train him has to be skilled. He maded JKD as a starting point for martial artist to find their own way and what was best for them. It was not meant to be a guid book on how to beat the crap out of everyone you meet.

muay thai "training and fighting are worlds apart mate" well.. your wrong on that mate! the level of training determines how the person does in combat. and if it is true that the great bruce lee didnt do much sparring who cares. he was said to be a great street fighter and there are many accounts of it. the ancient warriors never had sparring but did mostly kata, and they were great.

I'd say that Bruce Lee,Had gotten his experiance of streetfighting while living in Hong Kong,But i think everyone else is refering to sparring rather than realfighting.
However, IMCO, That fighting & sparring are different as night & day.
So who cares if Master Bruce had ever sparred,ALthough,He did have real altercations<Thats more experiance than most martial artist or MMA will ever have.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe all of the hype about Bruce Lee, But he was one of the early pioneers of the MA.


BTW, Bruce Lee was also a good promoter of the MA. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/cool.gif[/IMG]

Have any of you put your skills to the real test, hand to hand combat, no tournaments or any of that, wheater or not you make a living for it, if not who are you people to criticize others?

in my opinion Bruce Lee was a great fighter he may not have fought in a large number of street fights or he may have but having read his book and seen his moves in all his movies i would say he is an excellent fighter if you can do all those moves you gotta know how to fight you can lose 15 fights and win only 10 yet still be a good fighter but that is just my opinion i dont know if im right or wrong that is just what i think nobody has to agree with me.

Bruce Lee was a good martial artist anybody has got to admit that but his real love was acting he was in comercials and the like since he was a little kid, and everyone thinks he grew up in china or somwhere in asia but he was born and grew up in San Franciso and he started in martial arts when he was around 13 years old and he didnt create Jeet Kune Do many people believe that also but no he did study it but he only revised it sort of improved upon it, and created the famouse term "you have to be like water" because water can shape into any form and be in a calm flow and sudenly crash down in an instant.

so bruce was born in the USA and did not invent JKD

lol ok

Does anybody recall the fact that proven fighters and Masters who are respected today have acknowledge Bruce as a great trainer, fighter, teacher, etc.? Greats like Joe Lewis, Dan Inosanto, Ed Parker, Bob Wall, and Chuck Norris. People who themselves were great fighters. Training is one thing but practical application is another. Do people really think that people like Joe Lewis or Dan Inosanto trained with Bruce but never fought against him? In your training over the years, have you never actually fought against your instructor or teacher? In doing so, were you or were you not able to gauge their fighting ability? Don't you think Joe Lewis would do the same? Dont you think Chuck Norris would test what he had been taught to see if actually works against the person who taught it to him? If he couldnt fight, would a true fighter respect him or what he had to say? Come on people. Look, I am a parent as well as a martial artist. I know I would not take advice on how to raise my child from some one who isnt a good parent themselves. Do you think a trained, professional fighter would continue to train under someone who they felt could not fight? Highly unlikely. Bruce Lee was the first to see the benefit behind combining Arts. Now, many decades later, you see people outside of JKD blending arts where as before, people taught one style and argued about its superiority. Now you look around, and many of the people respected as leaders in their Arts today praise the benefits of combining Arts. Look at the UFAF under Chuck Norris today. A balance of striking Arts and Ground Fighting. What we are just realizing in the last 5-10 years, Bruce Lee taught almost his entire career. Say what you will but the man's legacy continues today and his former students still praise him and the benefits they gained from him. True fighters giving praise to a man they respected. As a fighter, I only respect you if I know you have skills. I only know if I have tested you or someone I respect has tested you. I respect Joe Lewis, Chuck Norris, Dan Inosanto, and Ed Parker. That's good enough for me.

Razor

I don't think its a question of respect.

Nor its it about the mans conttribution to martial arts.

My questions have only to do with "tall tales" my questions have to do with the rep of guy that claims are made of superhuman fighting ability.

That seems to have actually "fought" no-one.

Which seems odd to me that a guy that is "known" as a fighter--actually seems to have "fought" no-one.

And just an FYI Joe Lewis and others have made public statments that call into question Lee's fighting abilites.

The best respect I can pay to a man is respecting him for what he did--its not respect to belive the myths.

cxt:

Not sure I am following you on this. Bruce Lee was one of the first instructors (in modern times) to utilize/popularize full contact sparring, as many of his student's can verify. So, when you say he didn't fight anyone, are you referring to tournament competition? I think class room sparring does count as well.

If I have misunderstood you, please clarify.

Matt

Trying to be through--not rude, if I am coming across that way then I'm sorry.

If you read thu the thread youll find it deals with Bruce Lee and "real" fights.

No-one is saying that Bruce did not spar--just that for a guy that keeps being held up as an example of some kind of "super" fighter.

There is remarkable little support that he fought anyone, ever.

Beyond what fights he may have had as a young boy and teenager in Hong Kong.

Even the single documented fight (and using the term "documented" here is a reach) has the witnesses and both fighters telling different stories.

I don't generally include sparring with his students as being the same as a "real" fight--and neither do most folks that like to repeat his "tall tales."

I was not and the thread was not discussing the what he may or may not have introduced--

(full contact sparring requires the use of safty gear which other than a set of boxing glove--was not relly avalible prior to relativly modern times--and even then karate-ka back in the 20's and 30's used them.

As did any number of Chinese martial artists

And several systems of chinese arts used some pretty stiff contact--sans protective gear)

I have the upmost respect for Lee, he was a major driving factor in bringing the MA to the attention of the masses.

But the man was not his legend--and no-one is.




[This message has been edited by cxt (edited 12-03-2004).]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rokujimaru:
Bruce Lee was a good martial artist anybody has got to admit that but his real love was acting he was in comercials and the like since he was a little kid, and everyone thinks he grew up in china or somwhere in asia but he was born and grew up in San Franciso and he started in martial arts when he was around 13 years old and he didnt create Jeet Kune Do many people believe that also but no he did study it but he only revised it sort of improved upon it, and created the famouse term "you have to be like water" because water can shape into any form and be in a calm flow and sudenly crash down in an instant.[/QUOTE]Bruce Lee was born in san fransisco? in that movie of Bruce Lee's life it showed that he was born in china and he came here by boat or air plane and i think Bruce Lee's wife worked on that movie too so was Bruce Lee's wife and that movie wrong?

Shotokan


That right close it down because it upsets ur world view. The fact is that there 100s of clubs out there in the Martial Arts world who have thugs running them. I suspect some of them are link to criminals and organised crime though I have no problem. I seem abusive clubs. I havee been a fair share of them. The only club that was not abusive well two reall was a judo club. Are saying there is no thugs running clubs, if so how do qualify this?


My own federation is one of the biggest in the country and is nothing more than a protection racket, you know how many newsleters I get from, or magazines, zero and I pay £20 per year. For god's sake they even do not have a proper address but a PO box.

There is something wrong here and its causing the demise of MAs in the uk because the rot is in. It is like gangs going onto shapping mall asking for protection money, some will pay but most will move out. A once thriving shopping centre is descimated, this is what is happening the MAs.

I think traditional ma will have its last days, the ufc and other events are pushing people to more solid sports, boxing, wrestling, kickboxing. These sports are sponsored, very widespreed and there is money to be made in them. The training is also a lot more intense, most places go 5 days a week and are open for a few hours, also the cost is usually low or even free. I box right now it doesnt cost me a cent, and if you go pro you can do it for a living.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Pei Ma:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rokujimaru:
Bruce Lee was a good martial artist anybody has got to admit that but his real love was acting he was in comercials and the like since he was a little kid, and everyone thinks he grew up in china or somwhere in asia but he was born and grew up in San Franciso and he started in martial arts when he was around 13 years old and he didnt create Jeet Kune Do many people believe that also but no he did study it but he only revised it sort of improved upon it, and created the famouse term "you have to be like water" because water can shape into any form and be in a calm flow and sudenly crash down in an instant.[/QUOTE]Bruce Lee was born in san fransisco? in that movie of Bruce Lee's life it showed that he was born in china and he came here by boat or air plane and i think Bruce Lee's wife worked on that movie too so was Bruce Lee's wife and that movie wrong?

[/QUOTE]

ppl seem to avoid what Rokujimaru said [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/tongue.gif[/IMG]
so guess it was not true [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/tongue.gif[/IMG]

I heard he gave dancing lessons on the boat [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gif[/IMG]

Chen Zen man you need to think outside the box. I read everyone’s post in here and yours are the most disturbing about judging a fighter.

Your Quote: Sure I have an advantage over a senior martial artist in my strength but he has an advantage in skill. Or should. I believe that skill overrides power. Power without proper skill is nothing, whereas skill alone can mean everything.

So which is it?

First some fighters in the world, be it street or MA’s or MMA that have no skill but do have power win's fights without skill. And skill alone can not mean just everything. I know guys that have tons of skill in there arts, but they think one-dimensional and lose fights.

Outside the Box fighter that wins Sakuraba perfect example. If you need more on him do your homework cause I won’t do it for you.


Your Quote: Besides that I have grown beyond the need for instruction, as I do not believe in one WAY. There is no complete system so why have an instructor who would teach me something incomplete? That’s not to say that I wont spend a little time with skilled practitioners to learn certain aspects of fighting that I feel are a good contribution to my own, but this amount of time doesn’t constitute me being called their "Student".

By reading this it makes me feel as if you don’t believe MA’s work. Chen it is one or the other and you need to not contradict your self so much.

Reaperblack: Martial arts are not for fighting, they are for ending conflict. If you think that martial arts are for fighting then you haven't learned any good stuff. The term martial art means warlike practice. War is about killing, ending a conflict as quickly as possible, while allowing as little damage to be done to your self as possible. Fighting is for suckers.

Martial Art’s is not about fighting it is about ending a conflict. Yeah by fighting! I have a big Martial Arts background and trust me I have learned great stuff.

I have been in a war ok, and war yes has to do a lot with killing and staying safe your self, I agree with you on that. But War involves fighting so all that served and do serve are suckers?

I truly hope that is a no answer.


OCman……..www.FrankMir.com

Mod, I really think this thread has derailed! What do you think?

After all the original questions have been answered and then some. Was Bruce a fighter? Sure he was. Perhaps some of the stories have been exagerated, but i'm sure the man could hold his own.

And yes if you sit down and read the "Tao of Jeet Kune Do" and "Jeet Kune Do, commentaries on the martial way"...
You should see immediately that JKD was mainly intended for fighting.

People can say what they want to, but Jeet Kune Do is not a fighting style.It is nothing more than philosphical vignettes written by a man who has been dead for thirty years.He studied Wing Chun,"western boxing",fencing,savate,taekwando,and some judo.How much can you really learn from a style by watching it for a couple of hours?Although he was proficent at Wing Chun.He was just a man with a lot of theory and not a lot of fighting experience to back it up.He just looked like a believable fighter because of his awesome physique.

Obviously Bruce was fast, had much power and technique so on and etc.

Why obviously. There are no records of fights, no videos of fighting and the only word passed down is that of his fans. As such distortions are entirely probable.

His fans? He had 10+ boxers under his teachings, he had lots of black belts under his teachings, heck he had world champions under his teaching, he even wrote a book on MA so I think that passes off as more than just a word from his fans about technique.

Fast, Joe Lewis said he never stood in front of a faster man. Not just Joe Lewis, just about every person who has met him will say he is FAST.

Power - Chuck Norris said, pound for pound Bruce may well have been the most powerful man on earth.

"Now given that he possessed these attributes if he could have been beaten by Chuck or Joe then it was because of flawed technique.

If Lee had these, why do you pick on his technique as being flawed. It could have been any number of things.

Before I go unto anything, I read in a book once that Chuck Norris himself said he could not beat bruce...when asked. I heard stories of Chuck changing his mind much later but I havent actually read the quote itself from a book or anything, just users on forums. If Bruce possed greater power, speed & technique...he shouldnt be beaten. However things like size & toughness would come into play, personally I dont think Bruce could TAKE a punch. He relies too much on speed and using dangerous moves which is why he wouldnt do to well in a controlled match where pure strength and grappling techniques comes more into play.

"Also I think any good teacher should be able to fight better than his students because he has more experience and a better understanding of the system.

Again, look at boxing as a prime example. The trainers cannot beat the people they are training.

Not saying I agree with first statement but boxing is a very poor example. Those trainers are mostly older or out of shape than their students. Those trainers are never looked at as fast or powerful. Boxing is also very different from MA, boxing doesnt work on techniques..maybe a little. It works on the moves a million other fighters use, just a matter of which athlete can execute them the best. Bruce claimed to be a practitioner, trainers never do, they just train.

As for fight records, I believe he entered one tournament in Hong Kong. The only one recorded, he won of course.

Heres some interesting quotes from someone who trained & fought bruce lee:


Temple of the Unknown: Is there any question that you wish people would ask you about Bruce but never do, and is there a question that you wish people just wouldn't ask?

James DeMile: Aloha, I cannot think of any question that I would say is pointless since I assume the question is given with sincerity. So far as what people do not ask, I find people do not seem to understand the difference between a fight and a tournament. People always seem to make their questions relate to the the martial arts side of Bruce rather than the fighting side. I wish they would explore the realistic side of Bruce's skill in the street, rather than compare him to tournament fighters. I read some of the comments by Joe Lewis and he always compared Bruce to the martial arts image that everyone saw and yet the Bruce that I knew would have blown Joe Lewis, Chuck Norris and anyone else for that matter that acquired their reputation by playing the game of tournaments.

Temple of the Unknown: How would you say training with Bruce changed you for the better? Was there certain techniques that you either abandoned or picked up? Also is there ever a time when you get tired of talking about Bruce and want to move on? Thanks for taking the time to come to the forum.

James DeMile: Aloha Kevin, I never get tired of reflecting on my time with Bruce because there were only a few of us who have the memories that are part of his Legacy. I was a heavyweight boxer in the Air Force. Over a four year period I had over a hundred fights and never lost one. I had a very big ego and perceived myself as the toughtest man alive. I was 5ft 10inches and weighted 225. I could knock a man out with either hand. Then I met a small 135 lb 5 ft 7 kid who believed his martial arts could beat anyone. I decided to explain the reality of fighting to him and proceded to show him what street fighting was all about. Needless to say I learned humility in about 5 seconds. He not only stopped me cold, but tied me up in such a way that he could hit me at will and the only thing I could do about it was... nothing. Later I reviewed all my previous skills, including boxing and threw all of it out as it was impractical against Bruce's skills.

Temple of the Unknown: I read that Bruce was going to fight Ali and that the fight was set up...is this true and did Bruce ever say that if there was one fighter he wasnt sure he would beat was Ali?

Thank you,

James DeMile: Aloha, That was pure Hollywood. Ali would have killed him in the ring. Bruce would have killed him in the street.


Temple of the Unknown: Welcome Mr. Demile.

First, what is your position on the various questions regarding Bruce Lee's actual ability as a fighter?

Second, What ultimately happened with the Bruce Lee film project that you were involved in, and how did you feel about Dragon the film that was finally made?

Thank you in advance.

James DeMile: Aloha Guy, The movie Dragon was a sad waste of time. It was 98% untrue. My project Bruce Lee's Seattle years is still being put together. I will probably just do a version for video release. Most of the questions about Bruces fighting skills are asked by people who did not know him. Most of the answers are from people who either did not know him or related their answer how Bruce would have done in a tournament. Joe Lewis is very out front with his comments and yet he always compares Bruce to either his tournament days or some world champion. I really enjoy meeting these people and always look forward to giving my opinion on why Bruce was the best street fighter I ever knew. Not pound for pound, but against anyone in a street fight. I was never in a tournament and had many street fights and I have never seen anyone that I would have been scared to fight, regardless of their Belts and trophies. This goes for UFC and K1. I'm not saying I could beat all of them, I am just saying they are tough, but so what. People do not understand what Bruce did in a real fight. They relate his skills to the movies or JKD. No, that was martial arts. Fighting is survival. It is mean, ugly and stupid and someone can reall be hurt or killed. Bruce knew he could be hurt if he got hit, that is why he believed a street fight should not last over two seconds and his personal skills were designed for that attitde. I am very opinionated and willing to discuss with anyone my belief in why Bruce was the best fighter I ever knew. And I still feel that way, 42 years later.


I think the guy qualifies as more than just a fan, 100 fights 0 losses...I think he qualifies as a respected fighter himself. If what he says is true then yes, Bruce can fight...

Marv

Ok, I'll bite.

He has his opinion--but so do a lot of folks.

Can he point to to ANY actual, real live "streetfight" that Lee was involved in??

Just one? (the only recored "challenge match" has more holes in it than a pair of fishnets)

The answer to that question is NO, so again we are back to opinion.

Which is cool--everyone has one.

Anyone see the John Little documentary on the making of "Game of Death"? I forget the name, maybe " Bruce Lee : the warrior within"?

There was some cool video of Bruce Lee and ??? doing a full contact demo at a tournament.

There was also some video of a rooftop brawl, narrated as to seem that it showed Bruce fighting someone. I am unclear on whether it actually WAS him, though.

No offense to anyone here, but from what I know watching Bruce biography, written by an american person, Joe Lewis was nobody before he train with Bruce after Lewis train with Brue Lee for 9 month or so, He went on and compete and win numerously title because of what he learn from Mr. Lee, So from stand point of view Lewis is Bruce lee students like or not, even chuck norris to , and alot of higher profile celebility, and that Basketball Player who was in one of his movie. I think it ashame that Mr. Lewis saying stuff like that to his Master or instructor who help him become who he is.

Some of you here might degree with me

it all about people opinion, well here my opinion

taichi

joe six pack i disagree just because you move, and train well means nothing. Of course those skills are important but if you never fight, you will never be a good fighter. Training and being quick, and good in an art is great, and necessary, but you must fight, and see how to use those skills against someone who fights back, not a training partner or bag. I think if all you do is train in a controlled slowed down environment, you will never be a great fighter.

[QUOTE]Good fighter? Good street fighter, good tournament fighter or good ring fighter? [/QUOTE] We talked so much about if Bruce Lee could fight, hell yes! Bruce never claimed to be a good ring fighter, tournment fighter etc, he only voiced his opinions on what one needs to do to be a good street fight survivor. A real fight ends in seconds and that is precisely what Bruce was aiming at. He realized his mistake when we fought a Chinese martial artist named Wong. What mistake? My observation is this: All the while Bruce was thinking that his Wing Chun could stand-up in street fight and when he fought Wong, the fight went on for 30 mins....what happened? When two martial artists fought, it didn't turned-up like a street brawl, probably it turned-up like a ring fight which Bruce is not prepared for. He was very tired after the fight, and he realized that in this kind of fight, one needed more arsenals hence he opened-up. His new concept of JKD tried to fit in both, street brawl kind of fighting and ring (prolonged fighting) but Bruce maintained that he only concerned about street survivor and not ring. In one interview he said "if you cut my skin, I'll break your bone, if you broke my bone, I'll take your life". Bruce trained to be superfit so that if in the event that he gets into a street fight, he'll survive it and with trade-off if needed. His main objective of self-defence is street survivor, therefore if you ask if Bruce could beat Joe Lewis in ring? No, but can he beat Joe in no hold bar fighting?..I am all for Bruce simply because he is meaner and like what Bruce had said "you must learn to like dying".

ok Im hearing all this talk about street fighting and sparring,skill etc.
Now I have only been given a small amount of martial arts training but have trained with this limited knowledge,I have trained for speed and technique which equals power,sparring is also useful HOWEVER!! no amount of training in a gym or dojo can prepare you for a REAL street fight where someone wants to rip off your face.Now I have had many many street fights,sometimes against multiple opponents and my speed and technique gets the job done for me but you must be prepared to kill and prepared to die and I mean this with all honesty,there is no control in the street no ref no rules just you and your opponent/s.Its a whole different game when someone full of hate wants to kill you,the are in your face and youve got to shut them down quick before they hurt you.And belive me if 4 big guys wanted to kick my arse and I can get away I would run,but cornered I would fight to the death.

Lee could fight, amazingly. He knocked down Ken Kazama (13 ranked man in Japan) in 12 seconds.

Come on guys!! This isnt brain surgery.. a person who trained so hard and showed his skill through demonstrations and also has written volumes on tactics of how to beat your opponent and had all the philoshophy in place. The likelihood that this same guy couldnt fight in real life is a bit absolutely minimal. Just because he didnt and tell the world about it, you people question it.
FOR SHAME
-Ayub

Ayub

No, the "shame" is all this time and all this "ink" over a question that has been asked and answered MANY times before.

Answered ad nausem in fact.

The shame is folks are still trying to defend the supposed "fighting abilty" of a guy that has been dead for 30 + years.

The shame is the lengths of conjecture and leaps of logic that folks resort to "prove" what 30 + years after the fact was NEVER shown when Lee was alive.

Namely that he could fight--other than his students I mean.

Could he actually fight--probably.

But say he could not?

Does that mar his memory in any regard?

Hell no.

The best legacy of man is his actual accomplishments.

In Lee's case they were many, valuable and long lasting.

Myths and "tall tales" are not respect.

Marv
Ok, I'll bite.
He has his opinion--but so do a lot of folks.
Yea he has his opinion & so do alot of other people who has MET & trained with bruce lee. Ive read countless of interviews and quotes from people who actually knew bruce, none have questioned his ability. Funily enough, the only people who ever questions his ability as an MA are people in the forums who never knew him. I have heard more people claim he was just an actor than Ive seen people think he can beat anyone. He certainly wasnt invincible but he definetly wasnt just some actor kind of guy.

Can he point to to ANY actual, real live streetfight that Lee was involved in??
He already pointed one, his fight with lee. This is a guy who can actually fight as he was a boxer in the US navy with 100wins, 0 losses. Maybe his not world class but however, he had a very big ego and bruce shown him humility in a matter of seconds. This is not saying Bruce is almighty for kicking his ass, alot of fighters probably could kick his ass the same way bruce did but it certainly answers the question of can he fight?.
Just one? (the only recored challenge match has more holes in it than a pair of fishnets)
More holes? 99.9999% of street fights never are 100% full proof as their not video tape. If you want fights where there are witnesses theres at least 4 at the top of my head. That doesnt warrant him being the greatest fighter ever, his record was never his claim to that...

Ayub
No, the shame is all this time and all this ink over a question that has been asked and answered MANY times before.
Answered ad nausem in fact.
The shame is folks are still trying to defend the supposed fighting abilty of a guy that has been dead for 30 + years.
The shame is the lengths of conjecture and leaps of logic that folks resort to prove what 30 + years after the fact was NEVER shown when Lee was alive.

Actually the shame is 30 years later people are trying to descredit a legend that cannot defend himself despite what hes achieved. The shame is alot of people are throwing a MA master into a basket containing the likes of van damme and jackie chan. People actually believing that the guy was simply just another MA turned actor and all his achievements are just products of hollywood as their not real.

Namely that he could fight--other than his students I mean.
Could he actually fight--probably.
But say he could not?
Does that mar his memory in any regard?
Hell no.
The best legacy of man is his actual accomplishments.
In Lee's case they were many, valuable and long lasting.
Myths and tall tales are not respect.

What is this myth that you speak of? Bruce lee can fight is a myth? The thing is, its an insult to believe that a man who trained 6hrs a day, going on to create an art can not fight. Logic spells this out for you. He sparred with alot of his students and they claim he can fight...alot of his students were already MA and alot were pro boxers. He sparred with Bob wall and bob claims bruce to be the real deal, thats coming from a man who has met, trained with him aswell as being a champion himself. Chuck Norris once claimed nobody could beat bruce, wether hes changed his mind since that quote or not...to have something like that come out of your mouth means you gotta acknowledge the guy and to be acknowledge at that lvl means something. Also I find it hard to believe that a complete fake can get away with being portrayed as he is. He must have had some sort of skills to back up his status or else he would have been found out. Ive seen many quotes from well respected MA aswell that knew bruce and actually believed he had fighting ability.
If the question was was bruce the best fighter ever lived then I would understand why people would argue so much against it. However the question is could he actually fight as if to say hes just another van damme, its an insult to his legacy. Its an insult to his legacy because his martial art, his jkd, his influence as a master of MA would just be a crock of shite and all is fake..thus what he achieved is all fake cos its based on something fake. I believe to lead people into believing something, you have to back it up to a certain degree. Bruce never led people to thinking he was superman, he did however lead them believe he can apply his MA in rl situation thus meaning he can fight, if he could not then he led the whole world to a lie. Its like me teaching a bunch of people MA then getting my ass kicked by the boy next door...

Marv

Ok, last time, then I am done here.

Clearly a waste of time.

1-Belive what you want, too bad the historical record DOES NOT BACK YOU UP.

2-Again, too bad for you, many of the folks that trained with Bruce have said very different things at different times--take Joe Leiws for example, he has IN PRINT, said both that Bruce COULD NOT REALLY FIGHT AND THAT HE COULD.

So they tend to cancel each other out.

3-The guy you mention above--the "100 fight" guy.

Not aware that the JKD community (or anyone else) takes those claims seriously--if your going to take the guys word the least you can do is provide SPECIFC info on exactly when, where and what conditions the "fights" took place.

See, I can't find a supportable recorded of Bruce fighting anyone like you mention.

So far as aware there is ONLE ONE SINGLE RECORDED FIGHT--and that has pretty much each witness reporting different things.

So that too is questionable.

See, the point is NOT what I think or feel or wish to belive.

The point is what can you back up.

And in Lee's case there is remarkably little PROOF that he possed the superhuman fighting skills claimed by folks such as yourself.

Don't matter to me--like I said I am more than willing to buy that he was a par excellent fighter.

WHAT I AM NOT WILLING TO DO IS "BUY" THE FLIMSY REASONING AND SO CALLED "PROOF" PRESENTED ABOUT HIS FIGHTING ABILITY.

ITS AN ACADEMIC QUESTION FOR ME.

Get it???????

Its clear that you have invested some real feelings in your "idol" otherwise you would understand that my not buying the "hype" does NOT MEAN THAT I CAST LEE AS "ANOTHER VAN DAME" NO-ONE MADE THAT LINK BUT YOU.

Think what you want, belive what you want, its your life and your time.

But to PROVE IT you need much, much, better support.

Hope you can find it.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cxt:

Marv

Ok, last time, then I am done here.

Clearly a waste of time.

"1-Belive what you want, too bad the historical record DOES NOT BACK YOU UP."

Records are for tournaments, its been proven already he wasnt a tournament fighter. Is a woman not beautiful because she hasnt entered a beauty contest? Thats a quote from Inosanto himself on bruce..

"2-Again, too bad for you, many of the folks that trained with Bruce have said very different things at different times--take Joe Leiws for example, he has IN PRINT, said both that Bruce COULD NOT REALLY FIGHT AND THAT HE COULD.

So they tend to cancel each other out."

Many? Only Joe Lewis has ever said that about bruce. Ive read so many interviews from former students, even Joe Lewis had very high respect for bruce. Joe has also admitted he has never even sparred Lee so hes is just another opinion. Joe Lewis said Bruce wasnt a "fighter", not that he could not fight. Joe is very strict in who he calls a "fighter", he wants proof by having seen you in the ring. Ive seen many quotes of him saying bruce could be "the greatest MA of all time". He acknowledges that he has the speed and power to be a world class boxer but he will not say he is a fighter because he dont know what bruce will do in a fight. He also pointed out being an MA doesnt mean your a fighter. Being a fighter and being able to fight are 2 different things. Surely believing that bruce is the greatest MA of all time must mean he thinks he had the ability to fight...but because he didnt he wasnt.

"3-The guy you mention above--the "100 fight" guy.

Not aware that the JKD community (or anyone else) takes those claims seriously--if your going to take the guys word the least you can do is provide SPECIFC info on exactly when, where and what conditions the "fights" took place."

Demile is an instructor in the US and own his own gym. Im pretty sure if he lied about his boxing background he would have been found out by now...I do not have access to US navy boxing records so I will not dig there but I doubt he would lie about his credentials. He admits he was beaten up by bruce...I doubt he would lie about that either. The other fights were witnessed by bob wall as said by himself, and his other students. I cannot be arsed to look up specifically date, time and witnesses for that.

"See, I can't find a supportable recorded of Bruce fighting anyone like you mention."

Perhaps you should research more...


"So far as aware there is ONLE ONE SINGLE RECORDED FIGHT--and that has pretty much each witness reporting different things."

I assume your talking about WJM. Heres another one for you, bruce lee on ETD set. Director of the film, bob wall and others have witnessed that fight...said in print. The guy was apparently a black belt.

Bob wall himself said he sparred with bruce...I doubt you can spar with a champion unless you have the ability.

"See, the point is NOT what I think or feel or wish to belive.
The point is what can you back up."

I havent mentioned anything I could not backup. I do not glorify bruce into anything he could not do, what I say he can do are words from people who knew him. They have better judgement on bruce than I do so if they say bruce did this and that...who am I to say he didnt? Not to mention quite a few of these people are world class MA's...norris, jim kelly, bob wall just to name a few.

"And in Lee's case there is remarkably little PROOF that he possed the superhuman fighting skills claimed by folks such as yourself."

None were claimed by me. Let me review these "superhuman" skills:

Speed - Joe Lewis claimed he never stood in front of a faster man. Chuck norris said he certainly was one of the quickest men in the world. Lots of other MA's claimed this or anyone who has met him, Ive yet to read a quote from someone who knew him say he wasnt that fast. It is also true that he punched at 5/100 of a second with hands hanging from 3 feet away. This was recorded and was quoted from one of his students on interview. It is also true he had to slow down during filming cos he was too fast, bob wall also confirmed this. Lewis, norris, wall, kelly are the few who mentioned his FAST speed...I think these folks are alot more qualified than I am to say otherwise.

"Don't matter to me--like I said I am more than willing to buy that he was a par excellent fighter.

WHAT I AM NOT WILLING TO DO IS "BUY" THE FLIMSY REASONING AND SO CALLED "PROOF" PRESENTED ABOUT HIS FIGHTING ABILITY.

ITS AN ACADEMIC QUESTION FOR ME."

I dont care what your willing to buy or not, its obvious you have your mind set. Even world champions and real MA/boxer claiming he had fighting ability wouldnt sway you. Im sure random forum posters on the net claiming he was just an actor are much better proof in showing he had no skills.

"Its clear that you have invested some real feelings in your "idol" otherwise you would understand that my not buying the "hype" does NOT MEAN THAT I CAST LEE AS "ANOTHER VAN DAME" NO-ONE MADE THAT LINK BUT YOU."

No ones asking you to buy the hype. Read the question on the thread "could he fight?". Do you really think saying bruce can fight despite countless of people who knew him saying he can and what he can do is all "hype"? Im sorry but if you think bruce could not fight...then you are saying he is just another MA-actor therefore in the basket with the likes of van damm of the beverly hills ninja.