Tweet
It doesn't matter the style of fighting, no technique is new. Unless one of those internal masters of a style that supposedly teaches you to kill with one blow decides to come out of hiding and starts demonstrating his skill publicly, nothing can claim it is so removed from traditional martial arts(TMA). Aikido isn't. Judo isn't. Neither is Krav Maga or Jeet Kune Do. A punch is a punch, and a kick is a kick.
These "new" arts aren't offering new physical tools, but new concepts. And its those concepts that differentiate TMA from new street orientated arts like Krav Maga, JKD, Sanuces. Concepts like "Don't kick above the waist" and " Attack the attacker not the weapon". These "new" arts aren't new, but the practice of cross-training makes the students more well rounded in different ranges. BJJ for groundfighting and reversals. Thai boxing for striking low with kicks. Western boxing for hand strikes. Kempo and/or Arnis for flow. Jujitsu and Chin Na for arrest and control techniques. Poison Hand kung fu techniques for rape prevention.
Yet, not one of the styles that the techniques are being taken from are "new". What's being done is people are taking what they feel is the best techniques from each art, and using them with a more direct, non-sports like approach. Today's street orientated arts are supposed to be geared for what its like in today's world of urban gangs and gun violence. TMA were geared for life back in the times of warfare on horseback, shields and swords ... none of which applies today.
With that said, to address the original question about JKD vs Krav Maga, I guess it would come down to who's JKD we're talking about. Not everyone's JKD is the same. I've met guys who claim to be experts at JKD, and watch them get taken out by traditional martial artists. Krav Maga is definitely more systematic, as their techniques and concepts are consistent. No matter what KM school you go to, they're teaching pretty much the same thing. With JKD, you can go to 5 different schools and find 5 different systems. The problem with JKD is that the philosophy makes sense, but its a nightmare to teach as a system. That's why there are so many different factions of JKD. Even the founder had a foundation in kung fu, which is a TMA. But IMO JKD doesn't really offer a foundation. Dan Inosanto has a foundation in Phillipino and Indonesian arts, and that's why a large portion of JKD practitioners do Kali and/or escrima, which is a TMA. But there are no clear cut lines as to "why use a method" or more importantly "why NOT to use a method". Its that kind of blurry line that has allowed JKD to be anything anyone wants it to be, as long as in their minds it works for them. Whether its adopting BJJ due to Gracie success in the last 15 years, or adopting Kali because Dan Inosanto does it, because Bruce Lee clearly said that Kali had no place in his JKD.
So again, which JKD are we talking about when pitting it against Krav Maga?
Aside from that, it depends on the practitioner, their athleticism and their understanding of their art.
*Edited due to grammatical errors
These "new" arts aren't offering new physical tools, but new concepts. And its those concepts that differentiate TMA from new street orientated arts like Krav Maga, JKD, Sanuces. Concepts like "Don't kick above the waist" and " Attack the attacker not the weapon". These "new" arts aren't new, but the practice of cross-training makes the students more well rounded in different ranges. BJJ for groundfighting and reversals. Thai boxing for striking low with kicks. Western boxing for hand strikes. Kempo and/or Arnis for flow. Jujitsu and Chin Na for arrest and control techniques. Poison Hand kung fu techniques for rape prevention.
Yet, not one of the styles that the techniques are being taken from are "new". What's being done is people are taking what they feel is the best techniques from each art, and using them with a more direct, non-sports like approach. Today's street orientated arts are supposed to be geared for what its like in today's world of urban gangs and gun violence. TMA were geared for life back in the times of warfare on horseback, shields and swords ... none of which applies today.
With that said, to address the original question about JKD vs Krav Maga, I guess it would come down to who's JKD we're talking about. Not everyone's JKD is the same. I've met guys who claim to be experts at JKD, and watch them get taken out by traditional martial artists. Krav Maga is definitely more systematic, as their techniques and concepts are consistent. No matter what KM school you go to, they're teaching pretty much the same thing. With JKD, you can go to 5 different schools and find 5 different systems. The problem with JKD is that the philosophy makes sense, but its a nightmare to teach as a system. That's why there are so many different factions of JKD. Even the founder had a foundation in kung fu, which is a TMA. But IMO JKD doesn't really offer a foundation. Dan Inosanto has a foundation in Phillipino and Indonesian arts, and that's why a large portion of JKD practitioners do Kali and/or escrima, which is a TMA. But there are no clear cut lines as to "why use a method" or more importantly "why NOT to use a method". Its that kind of blurry line that has allowed JKD to be anything anyone wants it to be, as long as in their minds it works for them. Whether its adopting BJJ due to Gracie success in the last 15 years, or adopting Kali because Dan Inosanto does it, because Bruce Lee clearly said that Kali had no place in his JKD.
So again, which JKD are we talking about when pitting it against Krav Maga?
Aside from that, it depends on the practitioner, their athleticism and their understanding of their art.
*Edited due to grammatical errors
but if you didnt you should def check it out
Comment