Reversed stance

[ecamd1025]

Ofcourse

At first accuracy is more important, but then lets get into timing which requiers speed to be executed. Especially if the target is moving side to side.

But the question I asked is if you refered to slowing down a punch, not on training but in an actual fight.

Its obvious that fiercely striking or brawling can get you knocked out, but I think it is safe to say that you can punch top speed but you can slow down the duration between those punches to hit the target and find oppenings.
But this cant come from practicing, it is more psychological. rather than repetitive, because if you think to do this the fight is already over.

[RedCrow]

GotaDeGuerra is explaining it well

First, we have to ignore everything that we have seen in movies and TV for the sake of talking about the facts about JKD and Bruce Lee. Although his skill still shines through even if by accident.

If you watch him in real life training, you will notice that his kicks and strikes are not as powerful as many martial artists can deliver, and please forgive me for making any statements like that which could be considered blasphemy. I will submit myself for the proper restitution after this email. What you would notice is the accuracy and consistency of style and execution.

If someone similar to me is presented with an opening shot, I could hit twice as hard and do damage which might smart my opponent pretty well or I could strike only about half that hard and only about an inch or 2 away and provide an almost fatal delivery if the situation called for it. Bruce knew that accuracy was always more important than brute force.

The misinformation so many people get is from the movies and TV because someone getting blown backwards by a "big" hit is the kind of action that sells movies. Just like when someone gets shot by a weapon. The person being shot gets blown back through a window or something, big action sells movies. But in the real world, the person getting shot does not move rearward at all if you hit them center. You might twist them a little if you hit a shoulder or spring their head back a little if you hit their forhead, but no windows get human projectiles blown through them.

ecamd1025 said "Distance is time and speed". Now please don't get the wrong idea about why I am saying this, but you must remember that Bruce was a great "tecnician". The only way you can get to that point is to carefully think these things through and use the terms consistently, and he did. I certainly want you to stay on JKD train of thought.

Distance is just distance. To move a certain distance in a certain amount of time is speed. If your strong (and fast) foot is forward, it will get to the target sooner than if it starts from the rear and moves at the same speed. You want to give your opponent as little advance notice of his approaching demise as possible. However, you have to determine your speed limit and stick to it.

>>Im not saying he is wrong or challenging him. I am questioning wether this
>>was considered. That the back leg being stronger will help you increased
>>the speed.

Well, this is not easy, but you do not want to be in a position or condition where you believe you need that extra distance to get your leg/foot up to your speed limit before you make contact. JKDers need to be able to reach their speed limit with their front or rear foot before contact. Maybe it will help to start thinking about speed limit and not breaking the sound barrier.

>> Im not clear on what slowing down means?
Hopefully the above and some of the other posts have helped.

Also, GotaDeGuerra said it well with;
In much of my military training, we use the axiom, "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast".

and I would add "and more accurate". Unless you military guys are still tossing grenades, "close" still doesn't count very often.

>>Since I do prefer right lead, and its stronger, that if you have a stronger
>>base the branches would also be stronger.
This is one of the main rules of Aikido. But in Aikido, especially Ki-Aikido, they make you pose and prove your strenght of base in ALL positions.

RedCrow

[ecamd1025]

Hi

I understood what you have said. It takes you time to travel to a store, right distance is time it is not just by itself, this is a fact, I am not creating something new.

Accuracy, is speed as well. In order to be accurate there needs to be speed, which will travel at a certain distance fast enough to properly time the opponent as they are moving. Im not speaking of bruteness, but acuracy is important if you go and pound someone in teh forehead and not knock them down then you wil see the importance.
I think it first should be cleared up what is meant by acuracy. Timing or acurate blows, I am speaking of both.

I dont have a style, or follow JKD. Once you create schools or methods, sell things , make merchandise to advertise you are astyle, that is what a style does.
please dont be mad with me I am not looking to offend. But immitation is a style, that is what you do you see and you watch and then you imitate what is done there.

Bruce lee did not steal anything, he invalidated what was unnecesary. by invalidating you come to what is. There is no method to this, this is somethign that you can not show to someone or write a book.

Which is why anyone who is following will not be as skilled as bruce. There is no possibility involved here. It cant be.
I respect bruce he was a good man. But Im positive that if I listened to him correctly, when he stated that with styles you go and you become that, the person is not important, you just go in there and become. You start to become somethign you are not. You can claim you are not a style just as you can claim you are not religious, but you were raised under those rules; taught to immitate what you hear or see.
No one ever considered who you were.

Have you ever asked this of yourself, Who am I? not who is that? But what am I? This is an important question?

Plese feel free to respond, I am not looking to end a conversation, but to create one? There is no stupidity.

Take care

[GotaDeGuerra]

The standardized physics verbiage is, "Distance equals rate times time" (d=rt). This of course means that the faster your fist is moving, the sooner it'll get to the face. However, I still disagree that distance, rate, or time are correlated to accuracy.

You used the metaphor that it takes a certain rate to get to a store- but would it not also be true that if your rate was too fast, you'd miss the store entirely? Surely, we can't take a jet to the store. Also as surely, we can't drive 100mph and expect to get there and home safely.

As for being formless, you are correct- Lee's intent was that each individual develop their own form. However, as everyone knows, there is always someone better; someone to emulate. For most of us, Lee is that person. We learn a great deal of things from people like Socrates, Newton, Jefferson, Einstein- all people that gave their lives to study. We, who take up other avenues in our lives, still learn from their lifetime effort- similar to the study of any master of any genre. Socrates was a philosopher who had nothing but the stars and his mind to guide his thoughts. Newton invented calculus in his head. Jefferson had a major hand in inventing an entire country. Einstein would often forget to eat as he was so immersed in his work.

I personally have distaste for those that argue, "Lee was the best fighter of all time and omgeez blah blah superhuman blah dragon punch of the uberpower!" Yeah, yeah, whatever. He was a great human being, and a superb original thinker. I think we all get carried away with Lee the fighter, and need to focus more on Lee the philosopher.

End rant. (Haha, sorry)

[GotaDeGuerra]

Also, GotaDeGuerra said it well with;
In much of my military training, we use the axiom, "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast".

and I would add "and more accurate". Unless you military guys are still tossing grenades, "close" still doesn't count very often.

The term is mostly used in what we call MOUT (Military Operations in Urban Terrain) or CQB (Close Quarters Battle). It's the military version of the SWAT stuff we see on tv.

There are many scenarios in which moving too quickly (as a unit, or an individual) could get you killed. So, it would make sense to avoid bigger problems by calmly rationalizing the little ones. When you go slow, you’re inherently smooth. When you’re smooth, you avoid the mishaps going to fast would bring- and in doing so- you go fast by contrast.

Though, we do still toss grenades. :P

Another thing I just remembered- the “The Tortoise and the Hare”. Stories like these wouldn’t survive the centuries if they didn’t have universal truths.

But yes, thank you for the compliments.

[ecamd1025]

Hi

The standardized physics verbiage is, "Distance equals rate times time" (d=rt). This of course means that the faster your fist is moving, the sooner it'll get to the face. However, I still disagree that distance, rate, or time are correlated to accuracy.

You used the metaphor that it takes a certain rate to get to a store- but would it not also be true that if your rate was too fast, you'd miss the store entirely? Surely, we can't take a jet to the store. Also as surely, we can't drive 100mph and expect to get there and home safely.

As for being formless, you are correct- Lee's intent was that each individual develop their own form. However, as everyone knows, there is always someone better; someone to emulate. For most of us, Lee is that person. We learn a great deal of things from people like Socrates, Newton, Jefferson, Einstein- all people that gave their lives to study. We, who take up other avenues in our lives, still learn from their lifetime effort- similar to the study of any master of any genre. Socrates was a philosopher who had nothing but the stars and his mind to guide his thoughts. Newton invented calculus in his head. Jefferson had a major hand in inventing an entire country. Einstein would often forget to eat as he was so immersed in his work.

I personally have distaste for those that argue, "Lee was the best fighter of all time and omgeez blah blah superhuman blah dragon punch of the uberpower!" Yeah, yeah, whatever. He was a great human being, and a superb original thinker. I think we all get carried away with Lee the fighter, and need to focus more on Lee the philosopher.

End rant. (Haha, sorry)

Teaching is emaulation, sir. You learn a book right, then you emulate what was said. Repeat it over and over and use what was read when the time occurs. You read the philosophers book s and your thoughts are theirs. How is it possible that somethign that functions on the old, to learn somethign that is new?

Take care

[GotaDeGuerra]

If we can see that distance is time. Then for me to reach an opponent accurately to the skull or body; Time is involved to carry out that distance.
From here to there. Home to work it takes me time. To carry out this conversation takes time. To read a book, talk on this forum, write, ride bicycle. Fighting takes time.
Take a second to think about it.

I'll think about it for awhile, but I don't think I'll get anywhere.

[Get it? har har har] :P

[GotaDeGuerra]

Sorry for the bad plug-

Since this topic has gotten quite a few views, would anyone mind reading my other post in the business section?

Thanks, and sorry again for the ad.

[ecamd1025]

Hi

I'll think about it for awhile, but I don't think I'll get anywhere.

[Get it? har har har] :P

Good one? Whats your name?
Mine is Emir, You can give abbreviation if you like.
Take care

[RedCrow]

Time, Speed, Grenades

ecamd1025 wrote;


Accuracy, is speed as well. In order to be accurate there needs to be speed, which will travel at a certain distance fast enough to properly time the opponent as they are moving.


I understand now what you mean, but I think we are not using the same terms. I think you mean that when the target is moving side to side, you have to hit fast in order to hit him accurately.

Now just for fun, and to exagerate the reason why I try to keep each "factor" , like speed, distance and target position and motion separate, if I could predict where and when the target was going to move left or right, I could hit him in the middle of the forhead with a bowling ball suspended on a cable, pulled back, and released at just the right time, just like in a cartoon. Remember, this is an exaggerated example! But the bowling ball would not need to be moving very fast when it hits the target nor would it need to move very far.

I had to learn to think this way because if I wrote a computer guidance program and I combined a few factors to make things easier, somewhere later in time someone would decide that they also wanted the (whatever******) to also hit someone in the forhead with a bowling ball. Then I had to go back and break the program all apart again. So to be prepared, and this includes MA's, I keep each item I use separate in my mind.


I think it first should be cleared up what is meant by acuracy. Timing or acurate blows, I am speaking of both.


My humble opinion is that accuracy of where your foot/fist hits is of first importance and when you are happy with that at speed "1", then you increase speed until you start to loose accuracy. Then you keep that as speed "2" and work on accuracy at speed "2" until you are happy with accuracy. Then increase speed, etc. But from my teachings, accuracy comes first, and slow as needed, else you just wind up kicking air.

In your example, I think, only my opinion, that you are tending to want to skip the slow and accurate step. This is common, but a mistake. Hitting the side to side moving target fast and accurately comes only after building up to it starting with slow and practicing accuracy from my past teachings. Patience and planning wins battles. Fast execution is important, but shooting bricks and trees fast will not win the battle.


I dont have a style, or follow JKD. Once you create schools or methods, sell things , make merchandise to advertise you are astyle, that is what a style does.
please dont be mad with me I am not looking to offend. But immitation is a style, that is what you do you see and you watch and then you imitate what is done there.


I am not sure I am understanding you here. For example, there are two main divisions of Aikido, Ki-Aikido and Aikikai Aikido, and under those two divisions, there are about two hundred styles of Aikido, but they are all Aikido.
Let me know more about what you mean here if you would.


Bruce lee did not steal anything, he invalidated what was unnecesary. by invalidating you come to what is. There is no method to this, this is something that you can not show to someone or write a book.


Well, I guess you would have to talk with some philosopher about what "stealing" is, but certainly Bruce copied what he considered to be the best and most useful to him from several disciplines of MA's. This is by his own word. He kept what he wanted and threw out what he didn't want. I am paraphrasing because I am too lazy to look up his exact words right now.

If he invented everything he did, he would have gotten nothing done.


Which is why anyone who is following will not be as skilled as bruce. There is no possibility involved here. It cant be.


Well, I haven't seen anyone with supperior overall skills yet, but that does not mean there never will be anyone as good as or better than Bruce, (make note to self to extend self torture session).


I respect bruce he was a good man. But Im positive that if I listened to him correctly, when he stated that with styles you go and you become that, the person is not important, you just go in there and become. You start to become somethign you are not. You can claim you are not a style just as you can claim you are not religious, but you were raised under those rules; taught to immitate what you hear or see.
No one ever considered who you were.


I make no claims to have any skills at all, but I can understand what he meant. I have a strong sense of what is "natural" or "right for me" after about 40 years on and off of MA. To continue studying, I have to practice what I am told even though I know I intend to forget a certain technique the instant I get out the door (unless I need to remember it long enough for a test or something). However, the next technique might be a gem or a new twist (no pun intended) or a slight variation that "smooths" a bump in the road of my mind for a tecnique I thought I knew thoroughly.


Have you ever asked this of yourself, Who am I? not who is that? But what am I? This is an important question?
Plese feel free to respond, I am not looking to end a conversation, but to create one? There is no stupidity.


Yes, I used to think of it often. Oddly enough, the answer to this question comes to all who seek it in the correct time for them to understand it. I have the answer to the question for me, but it would not have meant much to me if I had received the answer 30 years ago.


Though, we do still toss grenades. :P


I feel so dumb! Of course you still use grenades. Somehow my mind got all screwed up with the "Close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades" saying and when I translated that to the computer, it came out really stupid sounding.

Well, I guess its time to go stick my head in the microwave oven!

This is a good discussion, please feel free to keep it alive.

RedCrow

[ecamd1025]

Hey red crow, how are you?

ecamd1025 wrote;


Accuracy, is speed as well. In order to be accurate there needs to be speed, which will travel at a certain distance fast enough to properly time the opponent as they are moving.


I understand now what you mean, but I think we are not using the same terms. I think you mean that when the target is moving side to side, you have to hit fast in order to hit him accurately.

Now just for fun, and to exagerate the reason why I try to keep each "factor" , like speed, distance and target position and motion separate, if I could predict where and when the target was going to move left or right, I could hit him in the middle of the forhead with a bowling ball suspended on a cable, pulled back, and released at just the right time, just like in a cartoon. Remember, this is an exaggerated example! But the bowling ball would not need to be moving very fast when it hits the target nor would it need to move very far.

I had to learn to think this way because if I wrote a computer guidance program and I combined a few factors to make things easier, somewhere later in time someone would decide that they also wanted the (whatever******) to also hit someone in the forhead with a bowling ball. Then I had to go back and break the program all apart again. So to be prepared, and this includes MA's, I keep each item I use separate in my mind.


I think it first should be cleared up what is meant by acuracy. Timing or acurate blows, I am speaking of both.


My humble opinion is that accuracy of where your foot/fist hits is of first importance and when you are happy with that at speed "1", then you increase speed until you start to loose accuracy. Then you keep that as speed "2" and work on accuracy at speed "2" until you are happy with accuracy. Then increase speed, etc. But from my teachings, accuracy comes first, and slow as needed, else you just wind up kicking air.

In your example, I think, only my opinion, that you are tending to want to skip the slow and accurate step. This is common, but a mistake. Hitting the side to side moving target fast and accurately comes only after building up to it starting with slow and practicing accuracy from my past teachings. Patience and planning wins battles. Fast execution is important, but shooting bricks and trees fast will not win the battle.


I dont have a style, or follow JKD. Once you create schools or methods, sell things , make merchandise to advertise you are astyle, that is what a style does.
please dont be mad with me I am not looking to offend. But immitation is a style, that is what you do you see and you watch and then you imitate what is done there.


I am not sure I am understanding you here. For example, there are two main divisions of Aikido, Ki-Aikido and Aikikai Aikido, and under those two divisions, there are about two hundred styles of Aikido, but they are all Aikido.
Let me know more about what you mean here if you would.


Bruce lee did not steal anything, he invalidated what was unnecesary. by invalidating you come to what is. There is no method to this, this is something that you can not show to someone or write a book.


Well, I guess you would have to talk with some philosopher about what "stealing" is, but certainly Bruce copied what he considered to be the best and most useful to him from several disciplines of MA's. This is by his own word. He kept what he wanted and threw out what he didn't want. I am paraphrasing because I am too lazy to look up his exact words right now.

If he invented everything he did, he would have gotten nothing done.


Which is why anyone who is following will not be as skilled as bruce. There is no possibility involved here. It cant be.


Well, I haven't seen anyone with supperior overall skills yet, but that does not mean there never will be anyone as good as or better than Bruce, (make note to self to extend self torture session).


I respect bruce he was a good man. But Im positive that if I listened to him correctly, when he stated that with styles you go and you become that, the person is not important, you just go in there and become. You start to become somethign you are not. You can claim you are not a style just as you can claim you are not religious, but you were raised under those rules; taught to immitate what you hear or see.
No one ever considered who you were.


I make no claims to have any skills at all, but I can understand what he meant. I have a strong sense of what is "natural" or "right for me" after about 40 years on and off of MA. To continue studying, I have to practice what I am told even though I know I intend to forget a certain technique the instant I get out the door (unless I need to remember it long enough for a test or something). However, the next technique might be a gem or a new twist (no pun intended) or a slight variation that "smooths" a bump in the road of my mind for a tecnique I thought I knew thoroughly.


Have you ever asked this of yourself, Who am I? not who is that? But what am I? This is an important question?
Plese feel free to respond, I am not looking to end a conversation, but to create one? There is no stupidity.


Yes, I used to think of it often. Oddly enough, the answer to this question comes to all who seek it in the correct time for them to understand it. I have the answer to the question for me, but it would not have meant much to me if I had received the answer 30 years ago.


Though, we do still toss grenades. :P


I feel so dumb! Of course you still use grenades. Somehow my mind got all screwed up with the "Close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades" saying and when I translated that to the computer, it came out really stupid sounding.

Well, I guess its time to go stick my head in the microwave oven!

This is a good discussion, please feel free to keep it alive.

RedCrow

Nice talking with you.

Well how many possibilities are ther to kick and throw a punch actually, effectively.
If you think about it not many.
Now a man from japan,china, america, europe comes and says I figured one out, lets say a back fist. Now he combines alll sort of back fists combinations with what he already learned, he is highly immpressed
Being from that country and a native i guess it could be said; if man in actually owned land. But he is impressed; he invented this he has not seen this in any martial art, his art becomes profound as his style gets recognition.

How could that be, he is viewed as an inventor of somethign someone could have been doing for years, and this has been historically visible.

There are only so many things to do, then taking one out of a whole makes you very limited doesnt it.


With the timing yes, side to side, back and forth.
If you are speaking of acurately hitting a target, like properly hitting the temple yes, but that still involves time, because the opponent is moving.

Lets look at matter, your body is matter right? Matter moves, it breaks down it dies. This is all a proccess of time. Anything you do physically involves time. To grab sadn it involves time, as it is poring out of your hand this is time.


By accuracy did you also mean in a fight? Slowing down a movement?

Timing yes?


Sure teh aikido comment. Yes well aikido is a style, whatever the other person is doing is still aikido based, there are some styles taht incorporate, but they are still aikido. Combining more with what they already know.

Example, Lets look at a computer. Right iT did not just come to what it is now. It took time, piece by piece, but without the piece from teh past it would not be. Do you follow. So each piece was added, slowly, or fast. But it still took time. So the new was created of of the old which actually would still
be old. it is a movement from the old, but without the old there is no new.

Can they be connected?
And is it really new?


Funny self torture. No you are reading it partially. people imitate him, they act liek him, they start schools in his honour, to preserve him, creating styles.
Making images of him, So people want to be liek him, or continue ghis work, which again is imitation.
Bruce lee invalidated what was un neccessary, Not to speak highly, but in my short two months I have created very effective moves I have never seen anywhere but eventually did as I got more interested.

But If you invalidate from a total perspective, seeing everything as total, seeing that there is no japanese or chinese style, not verbaly, or intellectually, and the fact that there are only so many things that can be done. It can be seen, what is not valid. It is historically shown if you check out some inosanto videos that there was alot of stuff that no style had, even seeing bruces bruces movies. No one could come to this. Even his kicks had alot of difference. punches. If you look at wing chung he was punching very differently towards the end. Sure he must have looked at wing chung and other styles but, I dont see how if you made importance to a peticular dirt in your land that someone coming to take some to plant something; is stealing.

The land was not yours in the first place.

Take care, Keep it going I dont have a problem to any objections. Talk as you like.

[Oreomeister365]

Yeah, by now I know both stances equally well, at first I was little moved towards my southpaw, being left-handed, but the line between the two stances has been removed and if I switch it's completley natrual. And now I'm starting to feel better doing certain things in a certain stance, so it all works out. Stance dance.

[jeramia]

Personally i believe it matters not about the stance in which one does because the way Bruce Lee put it "Water fills the cup, it becomes the cup....Be like Water." i believe what he was saying is forming yourself to the situation as it needs it. I do not think it matters in which stance anyone takes, as long as it can fit you and the situation it requires. I have never taken JKD. the few arts i have trained in, and i loved it and i learned quite a bit. Someday i hope to learn alot of martial arts, such as JKD.

[PFSofPA]

akatrk

I teach students dominant hand/leg forward for fighting, but when teaching LEO I ALWAYS teach and emphasize having your weapon to the rear.When you're training,its best to train that way because in times of stress and adreneline rush you don't want to have to think about what side you should lead with. It should naturally be the stance that protects your weapon. Afterall, you're not in a situation where you're looking to duke it out with a mutt, but looking to submit and restrain and worst case draw your mace, weapon, etc.

[jubaji]

Personally i believe it matters not about the stance in which one does because the way Bruce Lee put it "Water fills the cup, it becomes the cup....Be like Water." .

Everytime someone quotes that they should be hit over the head with a giant mallet like in the cartoons!