3 schools of thought in JKD

[doubleouch]

When once there was 2 now there is 3. A few years ago there was original and concepts JKD. Those were the only 2 legit choices for JKD training. Thanks to a few visionaries like Matt Thornton and Burton Richardson we are seeing a boom of functional JKD out there. From what I've seen they have moved even further away from what Bruce was doing and are foccussing on what works in sparring against resisting opponents. It is a breath of fresh air for JKD and I'm sure Bruce would be very proud to see his art reinvigorated with new ideas and a practical approach based on good MA research. I think the functional JKD actually started with Vunak. His PFS was the first attempt to take JKD and pare it down to what actually works. I do think, however that he did not go far enough. Maybie it was his alleigance to Innosanto? His stuff is great, don't get me wrong. It is just not as innovative and cutting edge as Burton and Matt. Anyone else have any serious thoughts on this issue?

[Brokenmace]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: it's the artist, not his tools. Not his "art." Only poor artists blame their tools.

I should know. I've been a visual artist for as long as I can remember.

The so-called "original" crowd simply find that what they do works. I wouldn't mess with Inosanto, even though some folks downplay his "concepts" approach.

"Functional" in my opinion, is a kind of ridiculous way to phrase it, only because what is functional for one person is not readily functional for another. Despite the fact that most martial artists possess two arms, two legs, and one brain, our bodies differ to some degree. There are folks in this world who can and do pull off Wing Chun trapping. Even Vunak acknowledges this. He would say Wing Chun trapping is good against centerline attacks.

I've seen Karatekas I wouldn't face down in a bar. I've seen some PFS students that I can only shake my head at. These two examples don't reflect in any way on their chosen arts. It is a matter of ability, commitment, and, yes, some luck (i.e. who you get to interact with, when in life you start to train, etc.).

I was taught (and am being taught) in the concepts tradition (if it can be called a tradition), but I detect not a hint of rivalry between the different approaches. Not in my kwoon, at any rate.

All JKD students find their own path. That is the whole point. Becuase of this Vunak, Burton, Inosanto, and Davis are all followers of JKD.

Drill, spar, commit . That's it.

[doubleouch]

The whole idea of the functional approach is to find what is functional to you. That is why they have no set curriculum or certain techniques that you must master to move up in rank etc. I have seen the opposite at some concepts schools. You must learn heaven and earth 6 from kali in order to become a phaze 2 student etc. In functional JKD there is no set of techniques that it is necessary to learn. It is much more like BJJ. In BJJ if you can hang with the blue belts then you must be one regardless of what you know or don't know. I haven't seen that attitude from a concepts school yet. Doesn't mean there aren't any, just that I haven't seen it.

[Brokenmace]

In my experience that isn't much different than what I went through. The difference is really artificial, not substantial. Sure, we have ranks and tests, but they are used to publicly proclaim a student's ability, and allow new or visiting instructors and students to identify who should be shown what material. If my Sifu sees that you have a certain level of commitment and skill, he will teach you more advanced skills, and it is assumed you deserve the rank that goes with it.

I jumped straight from green to red sash (level 3 to level 5). This was because Sifu believed I was good enough to deserve it. After all, if your teacher is worthy of the name, he should be able to judge. Otherwise why are you learning from him/her?

If you are good enough to defeat high level students and no one recognizes this (in their minds), you are in the wrong school. Ranks are simply public notations of achievements already realized. We don't get tested unless we are already their.

I jumped because my proficiency (in Sifu's and other instructors' eyes) was up to that level. They don't hold you back at my school. We teach BJJ also, as well as Muay Thai, Capoeira, and Kali. As far as I know, ranks are a loose business in all of them at our school, and folks know who is good and who isn't so it doesn't matter. We only have three colored shirts to tell us what rank we are. At my level, I wear a red shirt. Anyone higher than me wears a black shirt. Anyone level 3 or lower wears a gray shirt. This is so we know who to ask questions of. It is not an ego trip, and many red shirts stay with the lower classes to help out.

There's nothing wrong with that, and it is neither superior or inferior to your accepted method. It is just a way. Vunak knows this. It's simply his style to do it his way and not his Sifu's way. That's why JKD is so cool. We all become good fighters (with commitment) no matter our path. You can't argue that Inosanto is a lack-witt with poor students! Even (maybe especially) Vunak and Richardson honor him.

There may not be a static curriculum at PFS, but the line between testing and teaching is thin. They certainly teach you techniques, and if you can't apply them you can't progress. Otherwise you could practice Aikido and claim it is PFS!

I believe we all reach the place we need to be if we train honestly and with curiosity. "Schools of thought" in JKD aren't holy shrines. JKD can't be broken down into partialities (e.g. schools of thought). Partialities are not JKD, because JKD doesn't hold to "A" way. No school of thought has rejected any of the fundamental principles of JKD. And these prinicples define the art. Techniques are their shadows, because they are not universal. They work sometimes for some people in some situations. The principles work every time with everyone in every situation, once their employment has become instinctual. It is the emptiness of form that allows JKD to take on any form.

Schools of thought in JKD are like different fish in a pond. They may be different sizes and different colors, but they all swim through the same pond. Only the pond itself is JKD.

Respect.

[doubleouch]

You make alot of good points. There certainly is not alot of distinction between the concepts camp and the functional camp. I think the differences are subtle, but in some ways significant. In functional JKD we do no trapping. We do no Kali. These 2 pieces are a very large part of the concepts crowds curriculum. I really think that many, not all, in the concepts crowd still believe anything Innosanto teaches is automatically "truth". I have seen this with my own eyes from more than a few concepts instructors. It is very easy to follow blindly a charasmatic leader and accept everything they say as truth. In functional JKD we respect and honor Innosanto's achievements, but we can and will throw away what we don't like. In fact at my school I noticed that we have slowly been erasing the word JKD from the curriculum.
Another difference between concepts and functional is that we have coaches not sifu's or instructors. This is a philisophical difference that is not insignificant. Our coaches work on improving our athletes performance not technique and curriculum. For a better explination of the difference than I could give go to straightblastgym.com and look at the Qand A with Matt.
Mace, your school may be different from my experience with concepts schools, but in my humble experience it is not the norm.

[Brokenmace]

You could be right. I've only visited five other schools in the "concepts" crowd. Obviously there are many more schools than I can visit in order to develop a full opinion.

However, most of the schools here in Florida seem relatively friendly to new ideas. Whenever I try new things, we work on it together to see if we can make it work.

You are right about the coach thing, for sure. What a coach does and what a Sifu does aren't always the same thing. Coaches, in my experience, push you, make you do better from a motivational standpoint. Sifus often fall more along the lines of making gentle suggestions and leading by example. That is just my experience, though, as I have only met six different sifus, and trained under only two.

I'm glad we had this discussion though. It has clarified many points of curiosity for me. Thanks.

BTW, when you talk about phasing-out the term "JKD", I think Bruce Lee might have reached this conclusion even before he died. He kept going on about it just being a name, and that he wished he hadn't named it at all. Something to think on at least.

Respect.

[StraightBlaster]

Um guys, the funtional jkd group is actually the closest to what bruce lee was doing at the time of his death.

[Brokenmace]

I think that's what I was getting at. Sometimes I'm long-winded.

However, I don't think it really matters. While I have vast respect for the man, I'm not into Bruce Lee worship. But I do believe his whole trip was more about the journey than some static set of commandments. He was after self-expression, and being a human, this self-expression changed over time. If you internalize the principles of JKD and use them to express yourself, I don't think it matters between "functional" or "concepts" or anything else.

Just my opinion. I could be wrong . . .

[Watchdog]

Um . .. Straightblaster,
This is not a put down of Functional JKD at all, but I was wondering in what way you believe Functional JKD was the closest to what Bruce Lee was doing before he died. My understanding of Functional JKD is that it incorporates a lot of western boxing, Thai Boxing, clinch, and BJJ. While Lee had some elements of each of these in his JKD, he certainly did not practice them to the same extent that Functional JKDers do. Respectfully looking forward to hearing from you.

[Jerry Wetzel]

Watchdog,
I see where you're coming from, but if you look past the realm of technique and style I think you could see what he means.
The "functional" group has continued training, testing, absorbing, rejecting, testing some more, bleeding,sweating, and pissing off those who would want to chrystalize that which is fluid.
Bruce was very into sparring and the whole concept of "aliveness". Folks are even exploring best options when it comes to personal protection (O/C, firearms,etc.).
But, in the end, who cares what bruce WAS doing really?

Jerry

[Brokenmace]

I train in a concepts school, for lack of a better word. We do drills, but I don't see anything "dead" about them.

You need basics. But we don't stop there. It's not like we stand in place during a clinching drill and just "let" someone grab our head.

I mean, please.

[Watchdog]

Hi Jerry,
I agree with you in terms of the SBG's emphasis on aliveness and testing as being the same as what Bruce was doing. I think in that regard they are very similar in philosophy to Bruce's approach. The observations in my prior post have to do more with the types of "delivery systems" that they use.
I also understand what you're saying when you ask who cares what Bruce was doing anyway. We can't get too caught up in just trying to imitate him or worse, trying to become clones of Bruce. On the other hand, I think it behooves us to carefully study and understand what Bruce did, because a lot of it, at least in my mind, is still valid and effective. Also much of his art, particularly the principles behind it, are quite valid as well (e.g., simple, direct, economical) and can apply even if one doesn't use the specific techniques that he used.
Talk to you later!

[Brokenmace]

Spoken like a true student of the arts. I agree with you on most points.

Technique-infatuation doesn't do anyone any good. Find a few techniques that you can pull off consistently in the various ranges, using the various ways of attack, sharpen them to a knife's edge in sparring. When someone defeats these, find a twist that will destroy that tactical advantage using the same techniques and leveraging the principles of combat.

This was Lee's genius. It's all about principles and tactics, not techniques.

That should be enough for anyone, where reality combat is concerned. Out of twenty techniques, you'll be lucky (or unlucky, as the case may be) to pull off even 2/20ths of them during a real fight.