Quote:

simplicity just isn't so simple!...I teach my students, that most simple straight blast can deal with 90% of the general public, but we train for the 10% elite.....Great thread guys


jkdwarrior wrote
Quote:


I have to say here that the more i improve, the more my movement (or standup at least) looks like Bruce's, and the more his concepts of interception and directness etc. come into play.





That’s good, but keep in mind that Bruce would rather you to look like “you” than “him”. That’s the whole point of JKD, liberation from form, patterns and molds. If you “looked just like Bruce Lee”, you’d simply be in another mold. Food for thought.


Quote:


I sometimes feel, however, that some techniques we learn in class, are tailored for a fight against the untrained individual (since it is also known as scientific street fighting, you are more likely to meet an untrained individual in the street) and i can't help but think things like "that probably wouldn't work against me, but i can see it's practicality". The problem is though, that when we spar, we generally do so with a person of around the same skill level, and many of the techniques that may work well against the lay person never get practised in a fighting situation.

For example, i can distinctly remember being told to step in with a slower, looser jab than normal to test the opponent and to make him think that this is the way i fight before stunning him with a fast, powerful, tight lead. Against the lay person, i can see how this would work, but in a spar, if i was to step in with a slow loose jab, i'd probably get countered if the opponent was of similar skill.

This also goes for other techniques such as trapping. I have rarely seen trapping executed in a UFC or other professional fight, and i use it very seldom in my own sparring, but when playing around with my mates (non-MAists), it seems to work very well and i can sometimes tie them up in knots.





It all depends on HOW you are training, not “what” you are training. Of course the “how” will often dictate and determine then “what”. Train realistically and hard enough and you’ll dispense with a LOT of things that are simply not very functional.

Classical compound trapping that is often practiced in the wing chun or Jun Fan form, is what I consider “low percentage“. Some say, “Trapping works well, all you have to do is spend enough time with it”. What? 15 years? I’ve spent nearly 25 years in JKD. 18 of those years I spent doing a lot of trapping. I have dropped the classical methods for a reason. It CAN work, but for it’s application in fighting it simply doesn’t -- unless you have an opponent who is timid and spends a lot of time being defensive. The problem there is, attackers ATTACK, right? Otherwise they wouldn’t be called “attackers”.

So “trapping” in the classical sense, is a tool to use against a defensive fighter or a fighter beneath your level of experience and / or skill. I prefer to train for the people who do have skill and experience.


Quote:


While i am aware that every fight is different, and that the MAist must adapt to whatever type of opponent he faces, i believe that the principles Bruce taught all have their place, and to leave some of them out (as someone suggested earlier) may be counterproductive.

Agian, i suppose it's all a matter of opinion





Every principle and concept of JKD is valid and has it’s place. In fact, they are inarguable. Many of the “techniques” found in the original form leave a little to be desired. Absorb what is useful and discard the rest, right?



simplicity wrote
Quote:

simplicity just isn't so simple!...I teach my students, that most simple straight blast can deal with 90% of the general public, but we train for the 10% elite.....Great thread guys





I agree with that completely. But that exemplifies the differences between a “strategy” (the straight blast for self-defense) and TRAINING.

That is to say, to have a simple strategy where the training is more complex.

I teach a very simple strategy for self-defense. It’s easy to implement. Training however is two hours long, covers the three core ranges (standing, clinch, ground) and can be exhausting. People sweat and move. Advil is often needed afterward. They box, wrestle in the clinch, wrestle on the ground and at times, hit each other with sticks.

So again, “strategy” is one thing. The simpler the better. Training however is more arduous, though it isn’t necessarily more complex at the same time. Perhaps it is the difference between simple and easy. Training is simple, though it isn’t easy.



-John