
JKD? Form must follow function.
The word is not the thing and the description is never the described.
If performance in a specific area is indeed your goal, then the
simple logic of form following function must be the standard.
And everything must be tested.
As such, here is a simple paradigm for JKD following that dictate.
As well written in an article by Mark Stewart:
"Lee felt that a real fight was unpredictable and that most
classical styles emphasized “dead patterns” instead
of live and spontaneous training. Lee believed that combative
sports such as boxing and judo were practiced more realistically
than most classical systems. Why? They made real impact and they
practiced live training and not dead patterns. Lee also came to
the conclusion the MA was Universal and that “unless there
is a being with more than two arms and two legs, that there is
only one style of fighting, the human style.” So, Lee conceptualized
martial art as a whole and embarked upon a scientific course.
Not one that blended styles but one that was born of the idea
of non-style, geometry and physics. One as he described as “simple,
direct and non-classical” (functional). In a sense Lee’s
JKD is a martial art with no rules that is practiced like a combative
sport with real impact (full contact) and live training."
This in my opinion is perfect.
Whether or not it's actually what he did is not relevant, unless
one wishes to engage in endless, and meaningless conversations
about what "Bruce lee" could do, which I find silly.
However, the ideal of it is common sense.
According to this idea that PROCESS is in and of itself the method
of JKD. And that method, if one where to actually practice JKD
would continue endlessly evolving. With the end goal of that process
being summed up as PERFORMANCE. Performance in whatever theater
of operations one is engaging in, self defense, law enforcement
training, sports, health, enjoyment, etc.
As such, anything left in the curriculum from Bruce Lee's time,
the "original" JKD material, would need to stand up
under pressure testing against other approaches. It would need
to be shown that that material, and its methods, serves as a better
vehicles for people in the various theaters of operations.
If it does not show to be a better method, in a specific field
of operations, and yet one insists on leaving it in instead of
replacing it with a more efficient method, then yes you have created
another traditional Martial arts "style". Fixed in time,
ceasing to evolve, and therefore no longer "cutting edge".
"This approach was very revolutionary during the time of
its creation"
Yes and no. Yes it was in the America of the 60's. No it was
not within the history of the USA and the world.
There are no new thoughts.
I own a book called "The New Science of Weaponless Defense"
By a man named Prof. F.S. Lewis. In that book he talks about strong
side forward, using a strong lead vertical power jab. A lead leg
kick to the shin, the ideal of interception, simultaneous parry
and hit, the importance of knowing all ranges, the need for physical
conditioning, etc. It also contains pictures of the mount, guard
position, etc. This book was written in the United States and
published in 1906.
As King Solomon says in the good book, there is nothing new under
the sun.
"and is still quite rare today."
Yes and no. Quite rare in what field of operations? In Law Enforcement
training? No, there are programs now for LE training, such as
Luis's ISRMatrix which are cutting edge and leading the way for
a new, safer, more functional paradigm of training for Police.
Quite rare for Martial Arts? Negative, every good MMA Gym in
this country cross trains and comes up with new and cutting edge
methods of 'beating people up'.
Quite rare for self defense schools? No, I think Tony Blauer
and others have made headway way beyond what Bruce Lee was doing
in his time.
Quite rare for traditional Martial Arts and the majority of "JKD"
schools? YES, absolutely. I would agree with that 100%. Sadly
most JKD schools around the world are using an abundance of dead
patterns, and training methods that will by design develop habits
in athletes that may likely cause them to get hurt when trying
their stuff against the pressure of a real attacker.
What is especialy ironic in this case is that the above stated
description of JKD is indeed very rare within the JKD community
itself.
If you do not label MMA as a form of JKD, at least within the
theater of operations we call "sport" then for that
view to be logical, and reconciled with the above stated description,
one would have to do one of two things.
You either have to say that the "JKD" you are now speaking
of is no longer:
"Not one that blended styles but one that was born of the
idea of non-style, geometry and physics. One as he described as
“simple, direct and non-classical” (functional). In
a sense Lee’s JKD is a martial art with no rules that is
practiced like a combative sport with real impact (full contact)
and live training."
Or you have to show how the "JKD" you are speaking
of IS the most logical and FUNCTIONAL method within a specific
theater of operation.
Because if one where to stand by the above stated description
the PERFORMANCE would be the simple proof of the pudding. Not
the performance of ONE athlete or fighter of course. That is not
"scientific". But the performance of multiple athletes,
over a period of time, which clearly shows one specific technique,
strategy, training method, or "ideal", to be more FUNCTIONAL
then others.
Which is back to the point of what we have done at SBGi, and
what Burton Richardson has also done. We have based our training,
methods, and curriculum on what has shown to work best under the
pressure of an aggressive resisting attacker in a specific field
of operations. Be it self defense scenarios', MMA fights, Law
Enforcement training, etc.
As an example, both Burton and I use the boxing blast instead
of the vertical fist rolling punch blast. Why? Because it has
proven itself to be far safer, more powerful, and more FUNCTIONAL.
In addition, all the SBGi Gyms have now switched to the CM boxing
method taught developed by Rodney King. As for myself, I started
boxing at 11 Years old, and have been around traditional western
boxing for decades. Other Gym coaches such as Adam and Rory Singer
also have deep rooted boxing experience. We ALL switched to CM
boxing because it has shown itself to work ten times better for
the students walking through my door when the spar full contact,
as compared to the more traditional boxing methods of defense
which are more attribute based.
As for "trapping" we threw almost all of it out, and
replaced it with clinch material. I had thrown most of it out
Years ago, as it clearly does not function. But when I first met
Randy Couture when he first began his MMA journey I realized what
the missing link in the chain was, and what we had to ad in there.
PROPER clinch.
There was of course some clinch before, but to understand what
a PROPER clinch is like one needs to really feel what a great
Greco athlete can do. Just as one needs to experience life on
the ground with a seasoned BJJ player or black belt to understand
just how dangerous they can be on the mat. There were no questions
as to what needed to be added.
The same holds true for the weapons curriculum. The typical 'Kali'
drills taught can often be more harm to the user. But Karl Tanswell
developed a method that actually works, and is FUNCTIONAL when
it comes to defending against a blade. It's not speculation, as
we have tested it thousands of times now in a completely Alive
environment.
So as you can see the basic rule for one interested in training
for PERFORMANCE is rather simple. . . .
FORM MUST FOLLOW FUNCTION
Not the other way around.
So according to that rule, the root delivery systems of stand
up, clinch, and ground, need to be taught and learned. These delivery
systems have already been created by experts in their respective
fields.
Which is not to say that they no longer EVOLVE.
However, as an example. If one where a white belt SKILL LEVEL
(the belt being only a sign post of skill in this sense) in BJJ,
and then believe you are ready to start creating your own delivery
system on the ground would be silly, and a lesson in futility.
One would need to learn guard, mount, crossides, headlock escapes,
etc. Why re invent the wheel?
Likewise, if you have little to no experience in the real clinch
skills of a seasoned Greco player, then one needs to become familiar
with those positions of underhooks, overhooks, bodylocks, 2 on
1's, and neck ties.
This is simply because it IS true what was stated above; a human
being only has two arms and two legs, and every conceivable position
you can find yourself in when it comes to the clinch has already
been researched and trained by those experts. Likewise, those
experts have researched every position you will find the human
body in on the ground.
Those positions and ROOT SKILLS are the DELIVERY SYSTEM.
Now as each athlete/fighter develops his/her skills in those
DELIVERY SYSTEMS they will discover what aspects of those DS's
work for their individual BODY, MIND, and EMOTIONAL make up. And
they will begin developing their own sense of timing, and "STYLE".
And EVERY athlete will indeed develop his or her own "Style"
as they acquire skill in the delivery systems of stand up, clinch,
and ground, through ALIVE training, and testing themselves against
thousands of training partners and opponents over time.
If you stick to the idea of a scientific method based solely on
PERFORMANCE, then that process IS JKD.
As simple as that really is, it seems lost on the majority within
JKD. Outsiders to the community see it more easily, but find no
need for the label of "jkd".
And they are absolutely correct, as Krishnamurti stated, the
word is never the thing itself.
But oh how humans love to argue over labels and names. It's the
attachment of the ego itself to a perceived outside source, which
finds such labels meaningful.
We at SBGi are ALWAYS willing to change, adapt, throw out, or
add, anything we find more FUNCTIONAL, or useful. But it does
have to be SHOWN to be more functional and useful for us to do
that.
Otherwise, it's just theory. And nothing we do is based on theory;
it's all based on performance.
Every change, every step of evolution each of our coaches has
put the curriculum through, has been based SOLEY on PERFORMANCE
within a specific field of operations.
JKD should not be Bruce Lee's method, JKD should be YOUR method.
The fact that it is still BL's method may indeed be the baggage.
After all, it should be each individual's own method, if it is
truly JKD.
Happy New Years! -Matt Thornton
Mark,
Regarding your article. Here are my thoughts.
In the first part you are speaking of REALITY as stated here:
"Lee felt that a real fight was unpredictable and that
most classical styles emphasized “dead patterns” instead
of live and spontaneous training. Lee believed that combative
sports such as boxing and judo were practiced more realistically
than most classical systems. Why? They made real impact and they
practiced live training and not dead patterns. Lee also came to
the conclusion the MA was Universal and that “unless there
is a being with more than two arms and two legs, that there is
only one style of fighting, the human style.” So, Lee conceptualized
martial art as a whole and embarked upon a scientific course.
Not one that blended styles but one that was born of the idea
of non-style, geometry and physics. One as he described as “simple,
direct and non-classical” (functional). In a sense Lee’s
JKD is a martial art with no rules that is practiced like a combative
sport with real impact (full contact) and live training."
This in my opinion is perfect. Whether or not it's actually what
he did is not relevant, unless one wishes to engage in endless,
and meaningless conversations about what "Bruce lee"
could do, which I find silly.
However, the ideal of it is common sense. According to this idea
that PROCESS is in and of itself the method of JKD. And that method,
if one where to actually practice JKD would continue endlessly
evolving. With the end goal of that process being summed up as
PERFORMANCE. Performance in whatever theater of operations one
is engaging in, self defense, law enforcement training, sports,
health, enjoyment, etc.
As such, anything left in the curriculum from Bruce Lee's time,
the "original" JKD material, would need to stand up
under pressure testing against other approaches. It would need
to be shown that that material, and its methods, serves as a better
vehicles for people in the various theaters of operations.
If it does not show to be a better method, in a specific field
of operations, and yet one insists on leaving it in instead of
replacing it with a more efficient method, then yes you have created
another traditional Martial arts "style". Fixed in time,
ceasing to evolve, and therefore no longer "cutting edge"."This
approach was very revolutionary during the time of its creation"
Yes and no. Yes it was in the America of the 60's. No it was
not within the history of the USA and the world. There are no
new thoughts.
I own a book called "The New Science of Weaponless Defense"
By a man named Prof. F.S. Lewis. In that book he talks about strong
side forward, using a strong lead vertical power jab. A lead leg
kick to the shin, the ideal of interception, simultaneous parry
and hit, the importance of knowing all ranges, the need for physical
conditioning, etc. It also contains pictures of the mount, guard
position, etc. This book was written in the United States and
published in 1906.
As King Solomon says in the good book, there is nothing new under
the sun."and is still quite rare today."
Yes and no. Quite rare in what field of operations? In Law Enforcement
training? No, there are programs now for LE training, such as
Luis's ISRMatrix which are cutting edge and leading the way for
a new, safer, more functional paradigm of training for Police.
Quite rare for Martial Arts? Negative, every good MMA Gym in
this country cross trains and comes up with new and cutting edge
methods of 'beating people up'.
Quite rare for self defense schools? No, I think Tony Blauer
and others have made headway way beyond what Bruce Lee was doing
in his time.
Quite rare for traditional Martial Arts and the majority of "JKD"
schools? YES, absolutely. I would agree with that 100%. Sadly
most JKD schools around the world are using an abundance of dead
patterns, and training methods that will by design develop habits
in athletes that may likely cause them to get hurt when trying
their stuff against the pressure of a real attacker.
You also stated:
"This view of JKD gave birth to the creation of many “freestyles”
and “hybrids” throughout the world. Not a bad thing
but not JKD."
For that view to be logical, and reconciled with you're above
stated words, then you have to do one of two things. You either
have to say that the "JKD" you are now speaking of is
no longer:
" Not one that blended styles but one that was born of the
idea of non-style, geometry and physics. One as he described as
“simple, direct and non-classical” (functional). In
a sense Lee’s JKD is a martial art with no rules that is
practiced like a combative sport with real impact (full contact)
and live training."
Of you have to show how the "JKD" you are speaking
of IS the most logical and FUNCTIONAL method within a specific
theater of operation.
Because if one where to stand by the above stated description
the PERFORMANCE would be the simple proof of the pudding. Not
the performance of ONE athlete or fighter of course. That is not
"scientific". But the performance of multiple athletes,
over a period of time, which clearly shows one specific technique,
strategy, training method, or "ideal", to be more FUNCTIONAL
then others.Which is back to the point of what we have done at
SBGi, and what Burton Richardson has also done. We have based
our training, methods, and curriculum on what has shown to work
best under the pressure of an aggressive resisting attacker in
a specific field of operations. Be it self defense scenarios',
MMA fights, Law Enforcement training, etc.
As an example, both Burton and I use the boxing blast instead
of the vertical fist rolling punch blast. Why? Because it has
proven itself to be far safer, more powerful, and more FUNCTIONAL.
In addition, all the SBGi Gyms have now switched to the CM boxing
method taught developed by Rodney King. As for myself, I started
boxing at 11 Years old, and have been around traditional western
boxing for decades. Other Gym coaches such as Adam and Rory Singer
also have deep rooted boxing experience. We ALL switched to CM
boxing because it has shown itself to work ten times better for
the students walking through my door when the spar full contact,
as compared to the more traditional boxing methods of defense
which are more attribute based.
As for "trapping" we threw almost all of it out, and
replaced it with clinch material. I had thrown most of it out
Years ago, as it clearly does not function. But when I first met
Randy Couture when he first began his MMA journey I realized what
the missing link in the chain was, and what we had to ad in there.
PROPER clinch. There was of course some clinch before, but to
understand what a PROPER clinch is like one needs to really feel
what a great Greco athlete can do. Just as one needs to experience
life on the ground with a seasoned BJJ player or black belt to
understand just how dangerous they can be on the mat. There were
no questions as to what needed to be added.
The same holds true for the weapons curriculum. The typical 'Kali'
drills taught can often be more harm to the user. But Karl Tanswell
developed a method that actually works, and is FUNCTIONAL when
it comes to defending against a blade. It's not speculation, as
we have tested it thousands of times now in a completely Alive
environment.
So as you can see the basic rule for one interested in training
for PERFORMANCE is rather simple. . . .
FORM MUST FOLLOW FUNCTION
Not the other way around.
So according to that rule, the root delivery systems of stand
up, clinch, and ground, need to be taught and learned. These delivery
systems have already been created by experts in their respective
fields. Which is not to say that they no longer EVOLVE. However,
as an example. To be a white belt SKILL LEVEL (the belt being
only a sign post of skill in this sense) in BJJ, and then believe
you are ready to start creating your own delivery system on the
ground would be silly, and a lesson in futility. One would need
to learn guard, mount, crossides, headlock escapes, etc. Why re
invent the wheel? Likewise, if you have little to no experience
in the real clinch skills of a seasoned Greco player, then one
needs to become familiar with those positions of underhooks, overhooks,
bodylocks, 2 on 1's, and neck ties.
Because it is true what was stated above, a human being only
has two arms and two legs, and every conceivable position you
can find yourself in when it comes to the clinch has already been
researched and trained by those experts. Likewise, those experts
have researched every position you will find the human body in
on the ground.
Those positions and ROOT SKILLS are the DELIVERY SYSTEM.
Now as each athlete/fighter develops his/her skills in those
DELIVERY SYSTEMS they will discover what aspects of those DS's
work for their individual BODY, MIND, and EMOTIONAL make up. And
they will begin developing their own sense of timing, and "style".
And EVERY athlete will indeed develop his or her own "Style"
as they acquire skill in the delivery systems of stand up, clinch,
and ground, through ALIVE training, and testing themselves against
thousands of training partners and opponents over time.
If you stick to the idea of a scientific method based solely on
PERFORMANCE, then that process IS JKD.
As simple as that really is, it seems lost on the majority within
JKD. Outsiders to the community see it more easily, but find no
need for the label of "jkd". And they are absolutely
correct, as Krishnamurti stated, the word is never the thing itself.
But oh how humans love to argue over labels and names. It's the
attachment of the ego itself to a perceived outside source, which
finds such labels meaningful.Finally, as I stated in the e-mail
we would be happy to participate in a competition, or MMA event
you put on. I will be back in Thailand with Rodney King this summer,
and we will most likely have 8-12 of our athletes with us at various
weights. In such an environment one can test theories as to how
well the training methods, and delivery systems one is using apply
against a full contact aggressor. We at SBGi are ALWAYS willing
to change, adapt, throw out, or add, anything we find more FUNCTIONAL,
or useful. But it does have to be SHOWN to be more functional
and useful for us to do that. Otherwise, it's just theory. And
nothing we do is based on theory; it's all based on performance.
Every change, every step of evolution each of our coaches has
put the curriculum through, has been based SOLEY on PERFORMANCE
within a specific field of operations.
As for this last statement:
"JKD does not carry the baggage of a traditional martial
arts style, yet it is still BL's method."
The fact that it is still BL's method may indeed be the baggage.
After all, it should be each individual's own method, if it is
truly JKD.
Have a great New Years! - Matt Thornton
---------- • ----------
Copyright © SBGi. All rights reserved. |