Is there a difference in the JKD concept and JKD..

Also consider:

JKD is the PERSONAL expression of the "truth in combat". It's also about the discovery of this through sparring.
Your JKD will be different than Bruce Lee's JKD (or should be).

As for throwing the cross (or ANY punching for that matter), I don't prefer to throw vertical punches BECAUSE the elbows are down. If the elbow is down, the shoulder is ALSO down and leaving you WIDE OPEN for counter strikes.


-John

Hello. I trained with Richard Bustillo for about 4 years. He is one of Bruce Lee's original students. He does not teach much of the original JKD. The main emphasis on his training is Muay Thai, Western Boxing and Jiujitsu. He also places some emphasis on on Kali/Escrima/Arnis but not nearly as much as the Muay Thai/Boxing. He shows very little Wing Chun to his students. I would Classify Sifu Bustillo as a "Concepts" approach JKD man. He will take certain concepts from what he learned from Bruce Lee (Such as broken rhythm, simultaneous defense & offense, intercepting your opponent, etc) and show you how to apply them to Muay Thai. He believes that JKD is self learning and self expression through sparring.
I also trained very briefly under Sifu Mark Stewart in original JKD. Sifu Stewart is a student of Sifu Ted Wong. As I understand it, Ted Wong was the last private student and a good friend of Bruce Lee. I must tell you that the "original" JKD was, to me, very different from the "concept" JKD. The basic stance was different. The kicks I learned there were very different from Muay Thai type kicks (but in my opinion, just as effective).
I enjoyed both types of training. I saw strengths and weaknesses to both types.

Yeah, my JKD is A LOT different than Bruce Lee's! (slower, weaker...)
Good point though, I love the idea of creating a style all one's own based on your strengths and weaknesses. I've known musicians that apply the "Tao of JKD" to their musical style--they take what's best from a variety of genres and methods and try to create a style that's uniquely their own. Easier said than done, though!

John, that's why I spend my time training as opposed to posting often on message boards. If I do post however, it's only to point people to JKD training; nothing more, nothing less. Well, with the exception of my usual tongue and cheek rhetoric thrown around.

Fluid Motion -

I can relate. I don't post on hardly ANY "JKD" forums myself. I'm rarely on THIS one. I essentially outgrew JKD (although I believe I embody it's core philosophy now more than EVER). The VAST majority of JKD guys are just Bruce Lee groupies and many of those that aren't wouldn't understand real JKD if it walked up behind them and played the FLUTE!

But it's all good. Not everyone is meant to get it. It's ok if many fall short. That's life. I'm good with that now.

Take care!


-John

I would also have to add that, no one and I mean no one knows where Bruce would have taken his ideas. He hated giving JKD a name...people hang on words that would have come and gone if he lived. There is no wrong way, just your way.

i saw a video interview with dan inosanto and he was saying that for it to be bruce lee's JKD ,you have to have been taught the stuff bruce learned and taught.
if not then its still JKD ,just not bruce lee's.
he was also saying that some of bruce lee's original students who teach have stayed completly loyal to him where as dan himself has added things and tried to progress on top of what bruce lee taught,and thats where the divide is.
he also said that bruce gave a JKD certificate(1 of 3 kinds of certificates bruce gave) saying you were personaly trained by him,and dan himself he got to level 3,which he could give rank to.
though when he died people said you cant give rank,bruce never gave rank,though dan says when he was alive he could give rank upto his own so he gives rank.

Of course, because as Lee said, JKD is "different for everybody".

-John

To me the difference is that jkd concept is teaching people how to express them selves with knowledge and explore it to discover their own way which is what lee intended in my opinion and the other jkd is just people copying lee's moves and teaching people them without really grasping the philosophical foundation that jkd concept is.

You and Matx

Now thats what I was expecting real non political or non base perface discussion of what each version is looking for. Not that I agree totally with your definition but it did simplfy the way some people think their way of no way operate.

What I was getting I felt was, I don't understand, and it shouldn't matter, its a family thing, or I'm not letting you in on our politcal issue. I don't want in, but I would like understand why it exist.

I think the original JKD or Jun-fa trainers are looking for the same freedom but they are tied deeply into having wing chun as base or larger part of the system, especailly the guys originally trained in LA. Except the Guru Dan who leads the JKD concept idea. Do you agree with this idea.

Do you think the JKD concept guys lean to heavely on the Filipino/Thai arts?

indeed people don't understand that wing chun was only the root of lee's jkd but it doesn't have to be the root of yours at all. the foundation of someone's jkd can be wing chun, karate, judo, aikido, boxing, thai, any martial art can be your root it's not your root art which makes it jkd it's how you express the philosophies lee tought to modify and improve your way. as for the them leaning on thai or the other to much that's all up to them it's nither wrong or right if it's trully how they express them selves. there of course as in all matters to much political non sense involved but to me jkd is ment more as a philosophy to improve your way or your art, it to me has nothing to do with which art is your foundation. wing chun kuen just happened to be what lee was trained in it could have be anything. jkd to me has not much to do with the art you use only the way you use it and express yourself.

i think i missunderstood the question.
i thought you were asking whats the difference between the different JKD people.
its true that JKD is anything..in fact if you go to the extreme everyone should even name their art whatever they want ,,JKD is bruce lee's word.
and thats the thing..people go off his name.his name cant be escaped when speaking of JKD.
Thats why dan inosanto came out,so to speak.too many people claiming they were trained by bruce or that its bruce lee's JKD.he says not many even know all that he was teaching.
of the students of bruce lee...some have stayed the same and havnt changed it ....some have added .though both root themselves in bruces original teachings .thats were his original students divide.change or no change
as for others......people who do karate ,boxing.judo ..were then saying its bruce lees JKD.
it wasnt ,..its their JKD.
for it to be related to bruce lee it has to have been taught by one his students or a student of the student,,in the things bruce rooted JKD in.
the grappling stuff actually wasntt taught by bruce...he was only experimenting with it...on dan inosanto....though without resistance.so they;'d spar..enter...go close and trap..go to locks or ground ..though the grounded person was offering no resistance..
thats one of the progressions dan inosanto has made ..they started to resist with BJJ etc.the muay thai bruce didnt go much into...and dan inosanto was taught it and traind it much more, later on after bruces death.
...thats my understanding from an interview and video of him showing what bruce and him USED to train.

I have never trained in a JKD class, so what I say will probably be rubbish. However, I have found JKD principles extremely useful in looking at my own art (Chang Hon TKD). Bruce Lee's Tao of JKD stresses efficiency and directness. I can see very similar principles applied to TKD blocks and strikes. If they are not there, I put them there- changing the bits that seem to be neither of the above.

I think too many people get "stuck" in the freeness of JKD. They go to a class and assume that what they're learning is JKD, when in fact they are being taught fighting techniques- the JKD must be learnt by themselves, through critical analysis of what they are being taught and understanding of their own body.

The "My art is better than yours" stuff is often trundled out, but the truth is that looking critically at an art is nothing to do with saying what works and what doesn't OBJECTIVELY. Instead, one must make a SUBJECTIVE analysis of what will work for you. This is what I love about the MAs, you can be what you want.

No you explaination of the Concept and the Jun-fa gung-fu/Jkd was the comment that I wanted to expand upon. The difference in teh two ways of thinking and why each feel that the other maybe going too far away form what they think Bruce would have like it to go. In one of Guru Dans writing he said Tha Bruce warned him not to embrace too many of the Filipino arts ways though he may be trapped/bound by them. Was this warning valid? did Guru Dan forget it?

Is the JKD/Jun-fa practictioners bound by maintaing only what Bruce taught or would have taught? does this make it a Lee's style?, In that does it contradicts what the real idea of JKD is, 1 being freedom of style.