Bridging the Gap!

This is were we have a problem you see techniques as if put in a bowl, never use a hand blitz unless done with a well placed strategy used to ..., if that was so why not just call it chain punching. I believe it was used as a finishing move and if it doesn't finish with another technique. Advancing on a stumbling or opponent thats not prepared or made a mistake you have to cover distance, check and hit him. That is bridging the gap, in my mind.

It doesn't matter if you studied with BL's senior students, what matters is that you are open minded to effective technique along with methodology, don't force yourself in a corner saying that you won't or can't use this or that technique because Bruce never did, U are not Sifu Lee. Knowing some of his students personally, you should know he would want you to be innovative to improve yourself. Which was one of his philosophies right?

Guys -

I use bridging both offensively and defensively and have no qualms doing so. I don't feel I HAVE to wait until my opponent moves toward me. Sometimes they are passive and non-committal, so I take it to them. I personally don't see a problem with that.

-John

I agree with you Jkogas some people get so catchup in the theory they forget the function. Some people hear the taoist philosophy, "Be like Water" they think of all kind of tranquil things.

I translate that to beat the hell out of your opponent anyway you can as quick as you can with out thinking about it, just flow. Might be to ugly a way of looking at it, but thats just me.

No pretty picture just kicka$$.

I am not an expert on JKD or Wing Chun...

I have heard that wing chun is "set in stone" or basicly there is a set move for every move the opponent does, I thought that is part of why BL developed his own philosophy.

that kind of "in a bowl" thinking may still be present in some JKD instruction or at least taken that way because of the years of Wing Chun that JKD is based off of?

Just an observation, and a guess.

That maybe just the reason sorta a (Pre JKD) Juan-Fa Gung-fu that calls themself JKD, maybe. Brilliant open minded deduction.

I'm not a WC or JKD expert either. But love the advance open minded mindset of JKD.

I don't care if you see it my way or not. You shouldn't care if I see it yours. The conversation would be over if we agreed.

As for being sad that I don't think its a big deal Who you trained with, Oh well. I'm simply saying that it doesn't matter because Guru Dan won't be fighting with you or for you. U will have to do it yourself.

Now if that ain't open minded I don't know what is, don't tell me I have to watch myself bc I disagree with your philosophy. WHO ARE YOU mister Ego?

As I stated if we agreed this dialouge would be at a end, I find it interesting. Not just your input but others, if you will allow that.

I'm not bashing you, you are entitle to your opinon, but so am I. I've been in the MA 25+ years, I think I'm entitled to a O.

Easy gents, lets keep things civil here. We can ALL disagree but our opinions are our opinions. Lets not put a halt to a great discussion folks.

LOL...see I don't bridge the gap!!

It's easy to make others do it!!

I am being civil JKogas, no problems or offence on this end!

Neko456

You say the conversation would be over if we agreed. So do you disagree with everyone just to make conversation? I hope I can agree with someone on here and still have a conversation with them.

If your comment about "Pre JKD" was directed at (and it's fine if it was), let me make one thing perfectly clear, what I do I do not call JKD, but rather use the term in public so people can make the connection to where the principles and strategies I'm talking about came from. JKD is what Bruce Lee called what 'HE" did and before his death closed all his schools and evolved past JKD.

You tell me I'm not Bruce Lee (I already knew that)!

You mention Dan Inasanto...never trained with him yet!

Then you yell WHO ARE YOU mister EGO?....why because I intercepted your verbal attack and jabs at me??

I'll say this, there are no absolutes in any combat situations, but there are laws of physics and such! No you don't have to agree with them, no one does, but it doesn't mean they aren't there and they don't still apply.

I also never told you to watch yourself, but rather watch what you are saying. I don't think you know what was said between myself and the OBL students because you weren't there. That's all I meant by that. Apologies if it came off wrong.

Peace

Also notice my last post ended with the word "peace". I guess when 'bridging the gap', some people don't see the obvious.

I'm civil too, I just get a little bent when someone states something then start getting upset that someone disagrees with there statement. As for asking do I agree with people to get along no you obviously notice that, I will not argue over things that never will change. And I'm not aruging now, I simple disagree.

I didn't mean to say you were Bruce (Lee is dead), nor did I say you trained with Dan, I merely stated that if you don't have the same tools as Bruce you shouldn't try to fight like him. And I used Dan because he is one of Bruce's more popular student making a point that who you train with don't always mean that you will have their skill. You must work with what you have. You only caring your skills in a fight.

I jab at no one I reply to anothers poster that brought a idea of why you fight/think the way you do. It was not directed at you at all, but if the shoe fit. Notice I'm letting you point the way. You are right I don't know what was discussed between you and OBL but I simple stated that I don't care if it made you think always wait on attacker.

Now you explained that you would never advance on a opponent, thats cool if it works for you. I never disputed that, I only stated that bridging the gap could be done offensive or counter offensive and defensively. Not just the way you use it. That the only difference in what we are saying I'm saying use whatever works, your'e saying you only use it when they come to You.

If we agreed of course we could discuss how it works and why. Not just use it one way or Your way. Use it anyway you can.

I refer to the "gap" as no-mans land. In trench warfare this the area is covered by both sides guns and if someone walks blindly into it they stand a very good chance of getting mowed down by machine gun fire. Like John I believe there is two modes to operate in here, but ultimately they both have the same aim of maintaining superior position and land shots that count. Letting someone "Bridge the gap" means that you are letting them dictate the fight, you are dependent on what they do. This way everything you do will be defensive and actually develop and reinforce a defensive victims mindset.

I believe that you should learn to control the gap, control no mans land if you like. If I'm working in counter fighter mode I punish anyone who enters into gap. My instructor always says all he needs is a touch, and that touch can come from me getting my hands on you or by heading you off as you try to cross the gap. Once I get that touch I'll tie you up and pound away. I see anyone who bridges my gap as being in my trench and once they are there I need to re-establish my position before I can mount a counter offensive...thats not proactive or sensible.

Also like previously mentioned I'll never just walk straight into no-mans land (the gap) because its just too damn dangerous. I'll either use some sneaky footwork and body positioning to out flank them or enter it using cover fire to hide the real big guns that are going to follow.

Working your martial arts game in reactionary defensive mode is a recipe for disaster and very rarely works outside of the gym. Breeds a poor mindset, poor intention, and unworkable unrealistic fantasy land "skills". Using the gap terminology you either bridge the gap offensively to make contact to get control or control and intercept the opponents entry into the gap to make contact and control. I've not met a single experienced practitioner of functional reality based martial arts who've advocated letting someone fully attack you before you do anything....that's just training be to be idiots!

Hi Gavin,

I agree with what you are saying. Controlling distance or "No mans land" is key to bridging the gap. Letting them fully attack you is not.

I'll try to explain myself clearer.

Lets take foot work for an example.

My opponent takes a step towards me, I take a step back. He does it again, but this time I only take a half step back (see he is closing the gap, but I am controlling it. If I didn't take the step he would be closing and controlling the gap.), most people don't notice the half step especially if they are heated and now they are in range for my attack without even realizing it.

I hope this clears the air on what I mean and makes a little more sense.

Peace

Yep that makes perfect sense.

I think also once you start on footwork, both entering into the gap and using it to cover people entering the gap, lateral movement is essential. I usually enter or retreat at a 45 degree angle laterally going forwards or backwards. This not only offlines your opponents avenues of attack (and consequently defense) but if you line up the stepping foot into your opponent you can practically realign your own hips for power delivery almost instantly as the stepping foot hits the ground.

For example when I jab my foot doesn't enter straight into the gap but at a slight half step to my left. Now if I don't realign the front foot to point to my opponent I'd be punching across myself, but if you land the foot at the correct angle the process of putting the weight into the front actually realigns the hips, actually pulls them round generating more torque (which can be continued up through the torso). Hitting on the lateral half step forward, in my experience, leads your opponent to actually line themselves up slightly into your shot as they also move laterally to try and keep all their guns on the gap.

Obviously a very simple strategy but is a basic entering drill I use to teach my guys about offense and not walking straight into the breach. Teaches them timing and dynamic body and foot movement too. The other advantage is that if you do miss, the opponents got to re-angle before they can do anything effectively.

Hope that made sense.

Another good strategy is to spend some time getting your feints up to scratch. Close half of or most of the distance on the feint, and make sure you finish it in a position from where you can throw your strike quickly. Try experimenting with different rhythms.

Feints that I have found effective include:
-A high lead fake to a low lead side/hook kick (seems to work especially well on beginners and lay people). The high lead should be extended pretty far since you will be out of range.
-High lead fake to a front kick to groin. Ok so i haven't experienced this one but its an educated guess.
-low lead hand to high lead hand
-high lead hand to low lead hand
-low lead hand to high rear hand
-Low lead hook kick to high lead side kick? People may disagree but the hook kick seems to line me up perfectly for the high side.

You can kind of figure them out on your own.
Saying all this, I still think that controlling no mans land and fixing footwork are the best ways to master the bridging of the gap.