What are the differences between Wing Chun Kung Fu and Jun Fan Kung-Fu? Is the latter just Bruce Lee's interpretation of the former? I ask as a beginning JKD student who is trying to sort these things out!

The correct definition of Jun Fan Kung Fu is Bruce Lee's personal expression of Jeet Kune Do, JKD being the principle and JFKF being the techniques he used. Since his primary martial art was Wing Chun, than JFKF shows a large WC influence.

Where I study we concentrate on more on Muay Thai at the beginner level, but after a year I'm starting to learn some of the JFKF stuff, so I'm not sure that I'm qualified to explain the differences/similarities. I know that many of WC's techniques are used, but we also strive to incorporate relevant concepts from other arts. My understanding of WC is that it is very important to maintain the centerline, lots of trapping, straight blast (jik cheung choi), etc. In JFKF, we can do this, or we can flow into other areas of training, such as zoning to the outside, BJJ style grappling, Muay Thai elbows and knees, etc. I'm sure if IFAJKD peeks in here he can set us both straight.

Hope that helps. (Actually, I just hope that was coherent.)

Originally posted by KumaSan
Hope that helps. (Actually, I just hope that was coherent.)

It both was coherent and helped, thanks! I'm afraid that the two arts I've just started--JKD and BJJ (with the same instructor)--are far out of my normal range and I have much to learn.

Originally posted by KumaSan
The correct definition of Jun Fan Kung Fu is Bruce Lee's personal expression of Jeet Kune Do, JKD being the principle and JFKF being the techniques he used. Since his primary martial art was Wing Chun, than JFKF shows a large WC influence.



I tend not to agree with this definition of Jun Fan Gung Fu since it was around before the term Jeet Kune Do was introduced. It is more correct to say that JKD evolved from Lee's Jun Fan Gung Fu.

Even so, it could be said that Jun Fan Gung Fu wasn't a concrete system, as it is basically just the 'gung fu practiced at the Jun Fan (Lee's Cantonese name) Institute', and that seemed to be in a continual state of evolution.

At its most basic, Jun Fan Gung Fu is simply Lee's heavily modified version of Wing Chun. That being said, it is important to note that Lee did not learn the complete Wing Chun system before he left Hong Kong. I believe he had learned the first two forms (Sil lum tao and chum kil) and part of the wooden dummy set. On one of his trips back to Hong Kong, Lee tried to get permission to film Yip Man doing the dummy set, but he was refused.

He utilized the trapping, punching, sensitivity, and centerline concepts of Wing Chun (among other things), and merged them with Northern kung fu, Savate, and Muay Thai kicks and a modified Wing Chun stance that allowed for greater mobility, much like a boxer's stance, which is but one of the things he pulled from Western boxing. Please bear in mind that this is very simplified.

It is Lee's analysis of the effectiveness, and ineffectiveness, of Jun Fan Gung Fu that led to what was first introduced as JKD. The rest, as they say, is history.

I think it'll be a bit before IFAJKD can respond, since I believe he's taking a little vacation right now. Wish him a safe trip, all.

Cthulhu

Originally posted by Cthulhu
it is important to note that Lee did not learn the complete Wing Chun system before he left Hong Kong.

I did not know that!


It is Lee's analysis of the effectiveness, and ineffectiveness, of Jun Fan Gung Fu that led to what was first introduced as JKD.

I think I can see how that could happen.

Interesting! I have a lot of reading to do it seems.

Good post, Cthulu. Very informative. Arigatoo Gozaimasu.

No problem, guys.

Here's a little more regarding Lee's incompletion of the Wing Chun system.

According to various biographies and an interview with William Cheung, Lee's fanaticism for martial arts developed early on, and he was always practicing what he had learned, doing his best to become his best. Part of this involved challenging other students in the school (I believe the challenge was doing chi sao, maybe not actual fights, though he did have fights with students of other systems). According to these sources, Lee eventually got to the point where he was besting some of his seniors. This angered them because: 1) Lee was challenging them, and it was considered against protocol to challenge a senior, and 2) he was beating them, which just made them look bad.

At this time, Yip Man had a policy of only teaching Chinese. Word got out that Lee had German blood (from his mother's side), so the senior students brought this point up to Yip Man. Yip Man didn't want to kick Lee out, maybe because of Lee's progress, but also just as likely because Lee had already achieved some fame as a child actor in Hong Kong. Yip Man reportedly also had a gambling problem; because of this, a group of his senior students managed the finances of the schools, taking care of the bills and whatnot and giving Yip Man an 'allowance' from this. They threatened to lessen his 'allowance' if Lee was allowed to stay (note: as time goes by, I find the gambling/allowance thing harder and harder to believe. Nowadays, I tend to believe that Yip Man was forced to kick Lee out to comply with his 'no non-Chinese' rule). Anyway, Lee got kicked out. He still got training for some time from William Cheung and a couple of other senior students, supposedly under Yip Man's authorization.

Lee always praised Yip Man and his Wing Chun, even after he had modified it for his own purposes. Lee also visited Yip Man and some of the Wing Chun students when he returned to Hong Kong.

As for Yip Man not allowing himself to be filmed doing the dummy set, here is the reason, according to an interview with Hawkins Cheung:

According to Cheung, once a student left Yip Man's school and began teaching on their own, he no longer considered that person a student but a competitor, and as such, he would no longer share the system with them. This is supposedly why Yip Man refused to be filmed doing the dummy set for Lee.

Please bear in mind that I'm writing this all from a very whacked-out memory, so I may have mixed up some facts and/or names.

Cthulhu

Oh, and here is my comparison of WC and JF, from my limited knowledge of both systems...

Similarities:
- centerline theory
- immovable elbow principle
- economy of motion
- chi sao/gerk
- gate system for defining areas of defense

Differences:
- JF has a greater arsenal of kicks
- JF use of strong side forward
- larger array of hand techniques for JF
- JF has more mobile footwork...not as 'rooted' as WC
- JF can be seen as not quite as aggressive as WC. JF tends to rely more on countering/intercepting then WC's constant aggressive pressure.

Again, this is from my limited knowledge of both systems.

Cthulhu

There is a great book out on the market that answers this EXACT question. It is called "Wing Chun Kung Fu Jeet Kune Do : A Comparison". The Wing Chun is performed by William Cheung and the JKD is done by Ted Wong. Both of these people know their stuff.

Thanks
Jeremy Bays

Originally posted by Samurai
There is a great book out on the market that answers this EXACT question. It is called "Wing Chun Kung Fu Jeet Kune Do : A Comparison". The Wing Chun is performed by William Cheung and the JKD is done by Ted Wong. Both of these people know their stuff.

Interesting! The book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0897501241/qid%3D1012535254/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F0%5F1/102-4447365-8711356) does seem oriented towards exactly this question! The reviews at Amazon are mixed--I take you think it not only answers the question but does so well?

I know of the book, but haven't read it yet. There are some things you may need to consider, though:

1) William Cheung is teaching what he calls 'Classical Wing Chun'. According to Cheung, the Wing Chun taught by Yip Man was not the 'correct' Wing Chun. He claims that Yip Man took him into confidence and explained that (to make a loooong story short) Yip taught a 'modified' form of Wing Chun, with less mobile footwork and stances. Cheung further claims that Yip Man taught this 'Classical Wing Chun' (with the 'correct' footwork) only to him. Until I see this book, I don't know if Cheung is demonstrating his 'Classical Wing Chun' or the Wing Chun taught to all the other Yip Man students.

2) I would also have to review the book to judge the JKD aspects. Most of the people coming out of Mr. Wong's camp seem to be from the 'Original JKD' group, who claim that JKD should be taught as it was when Lee died, without the FMA stuff Inosanto had added (and in fact, was already in the process of adding before Lee died). So, if Mr. Wong is demonstrating JKD as a set, static, system, I would have a problem with the JKD material, though that would be a personal thing and should have no bearing on anyone else's judgement of the book. Of course, I could also rear the ugly head of Mr. Wong's certification once again. I think that's been beaten into the ground, though, and like we've said previously, has no bearing on Mr. Wong's actual abilities, which, I am told, are very respectable.

:lol: All of this babbling to basically say that I can't give any info on the book until I actually read it. Sheesh. I ramble more than Tolkein <duck>.

Cthulhu
:D

I have seen the book (spent about 15 minutes with it in the bookstore) but have not READ it completely.
The book is laid out very well. It is set up like "This is a Wing Chun Punch and this is a JKD punch" ...OK look they are the same.

Then it does into detail about what makes the punch a punch and the read says "oh, I guess they are not the same".

BOTH people, William Cheung and Ted Wong, demostrate great technique. The techniques pictured are fairly basic so there is not too much worry about ...this is classical Wing Chun not True Wing Chun and this is OJKD not JKD Concepts, etc. It is basic information.

Please do not buy this book looking for the Holy Grail of Wing Chun or JKD. This is not the book you want. This book is a comparison between friends. It is kind of like being part of a private conversation between two great martial artist.
Thanks
Jeremy Bays

Could you clarify the Wing Chun bit? Here are the two versions of Yip Man Wing Chun according to William Cheung:

1) Modified Wing Chun - The Wing Chun taught to all of Yip Man's students

2) Classical Wing Chun - The Wing Chun supposedly taught only to William Cheung

So with these descriptions, could you say which is in that book?

Cthulhu

Originally posted by Cthulhu
I know of the book, but haven't read it yet. There are some things you may need to consider, though:

1) William Cheung is teaching what he calls 'Classical Wing Chun'. According to Cheung, the Wing Chun taught by Yip Man was not the 'correct' Wing Chun. He claims that Yip Man took him into confidence and explained that (to make a loooong story short) Yip taught a 'modified' form of Wing Chun, with less mobile footwork and stances. Cheung further claims that Yip Man taught this 'Classical Wing Chun' (with the 'correct' footwork) only to him.
Isn't it funny how so many mastera learn a "secret" form or technique that can never be verified.:D

I don't know how famaliar you are with chueng style or traditional wingchun as he calls and and the Yip Man style.
If you have a good internet connection go to

http://www.wingchunkwoon.com/empty.asp

it some some clips of chueng style WC, as far as Bruce lee from what I've heard is that he never learned the second form which contains alot of WC/WT's foot work.

Originally posted by fist of fury

it some some clips of chueng style WC, as far as Bruce lee from what I've heard is that he never learned the second form which contains alot of WC/WT's foot work.

I've heard almost the opposite, in that chum kil was the last form he learned. Maybe we can meet in the middle and say he was beginning to learn the second form :)

However, I would have to say that he had to have had some knowledge of the second forms, as one of his biggest gripes with WC was the footwork. Of course, this could also be interpreted as him not having learned the form, or not having learned it adequately.

Okay, this will settle it: let's go on that 'Crossing Over' show and get that guy to ask Bruce for us!

Cthulhu

Originally posted by Cthulhu


I've heard almost the opposite, in that chum kil was the last form he learned. Maybe we can meet in the middle and say he was beginning to learn the second form :)

However, I would have to say that he had to have had some knowledge of the second forms, as one of his biggest gripes with WC was the footwork. Of course, this could also be interpreted as him not having learned the form, or not having learned it adequately.

Okay, this will settle it: let's go on that 'Crossing Over' show and get that guy to ask Bruce for us!

Cthulhu
That sounds like a good idea:)

Nevertheless, it's impressive as all heck that he was kickin' butt
so well without finishing his WC training. In "The Curse Of The
Dragon", which is a documentary about Bruce, the story is this.
Bruce was pretty much teaching WC in his Jun Fan Gung Fu school
in China Town, in Oakland. The Gung Fu community there didn't
like Bruce teaching to non Chinese, and a man was sent. After
a quick exchange of words, "Yes I can" - "No you can't" type of
thing, the deal was, "Let's fight .. if I beat you(Bruce) then you
close your school, if you win then you can teach whomever you
want. So they strap it on, right there in Bruce's school, and
Bruce whooped his tail good. He was VERY disapointed in the
fact that it took the time that it took, and in the shape that he
himself was in. So he studied other arts INTENTLY, and came up
with JKD. A big influence was boxing, because it was a stick and
move type philosophy. Some say (outside of the movie, this is
what I've read elsewhere, in various places) that WC isn't as
static as Bruce said it was, and the fact was that he didn't study
it long enough to learn how dynamic it was.

Anyways .. (I digress a lot) no one here disputes that Bruce
didn't complete his WC training. Yet he kicked the crap outta
anyone that challenged him. The guy that came to his school
representing the G.F. community in chinatown was a Gung Fu
master, with like a 20 yr h istory of teaching. In the making
of Return Of The Dragon, there were a BOAT LOAD of Chinese
martial artists brought in as extras. There were constant
challenges made to Bruce, and Bruce kicked tail each and
every time, and within a short period of time. I don't really
care what who where Bruce studied. He had a commitment
to training, and studying that made him a great martial artist.
Ed Parker called him "Walking Death", and said that Bruce was
best martial artist he'd ever seen. It seems that in a LOT of
M.A. forums on the net, that there's a new fad of trashing
Bruce as "just a movie martial artist" or saying "I designed
my own system too, so what if Bruce did?". I'm tired of hearing
it. So many of us westerners owe our M.A. pursuits to Bruce,
because M.A. films before him were few and far between, and
were NOWHERE near the popularity of Bruce Lee's films, or
Bruce Lee himself. IMHO, he made M.A. a mainstream idea,
and made studying it "cool", in the U.S. I don't study WC
JFGF, or JKD, but I give credit where credit is due.

I waited eagerly for 'Curse of the Dragon' to come out way back when. When I finally got it, I was a bit disappointed. Far too much sensationalism for my tastes.

A&E had a Biography show on Bruce before 'Curse of the Dragon' came out that was excellent. Unfortunately, after the release of 'Curse of the Dragon', they started to splice some of that into their Biography episode and pretty much ruined it.

Re: Enter the Dragon

Yes, there were many challenges made to Bruce during the filming, but he didn't 'kick tail each and every time' simply because he didn't respond to the vast majority of these challenges. It was really a no-win situation for him: if he won the challenge, the challenger could say Bruce beat him up unjustly; if the challenger got a lucky hit in, Bruce's skills would be made to look inadequate.

However, Bob Wall and others tell of an account where Bruce did fight one of the challengers. He utterly humiliated the guy...kicking his ass while telling him how he was kicking his ass. Afterwards, the defeated challenger went back about his business a wee bit bloodied.

I've read an account that during filming of "Enter the Dragon", a promotional reel was filmed, sort of like a trailer for the movie. Supposedly, this reel had footage of Lee really fighting one of the challengers. Unfortunately, it appears this bit of footage has been lost or destroyed over the years. It'd be damn near priceless today, if a copy was still around.

Ahna Capri, one of the star actresses in the movie, has some 8mm footage that (I think) has yet to be released to the public. There was an Inside Kung Fu magazine article on the footage, and I believe there was some of Bruce fighting and/or sparring. I hope this is released soon. I don't think it's very long, though, which may be a reason why it's not out for purchase yet.

Cthulhu

In "Curse" they said that he stood up to a lot of challenges during
the filming. Maybe that's the sensationalized part you're talking
about. As for the reasons why he didn't fight .. in your opinion,
do you think that is one of the reasons why school vs. school
challenges have ended for the most part?

Also, note that there was one guy (name unremembered) that
came at Bruce with a broken bottle (as per the script)? He
admits to being kicked by Bruce, being thrown back about 30
feet, and breaking the arm of a guy that tried to catch him.
Now that's a fierce kick!

Lee didn't fight because he was such a big name in Hong Kong at the time, that it just wasn't worth it for him. I think school vs. school fights dwindled due to: 1) police intervention and 2) common sense.

The person you're referring to is Bob Wall. Before the filming the take that ended up in the movie, there was a take that went wrong. In Hong Kong, they didn't have the fake glass bottles used in Hollywood...they had to use the real thing. Bruce was supposed to kick Bob Wall's arms in such as way so as to knock both broken bottles out of his hand. Well, during the take, he didn't kick hard enough and ended up cutting his hand on one of the bottles.

Later, after having the cut sewn up, they did another take. The kick threw Wall back into some stuntmen, one of whom broke an arm. It wasn't 30 feet, though, or anywhere near it. I believe that particular kick is what ended up in the movie, so you can see that for yourself.

Also, look for a young Jackie Chan getting his neck broken by Bruce!

Cthulhu

Originally posted by Cthulhu

However, Bob Wall and others tell of an account where Bruce did fight one of the challengers. He utterly humiliated the guy...kicking his ass while telling him how he was kicking his ass. Afterwards, the defeated challenger went back about his business a wee bit bloodied.
Cthulhu
LOL thats gotta hurt more than bruce's kicks and punches.

. It wasn't 30 feet, though, or anywhere near it. I believe
that particular kick is what ended up in the movie, so you can see
that for yourself.


30 feet was what was stated in "Curse", by the producer. That's
what I was refering to. They showed the kick in the movie also,
and yep, it didn't look like 30 feet at all.

Originally posted by Kirk

30 feet was what was stated in "Curse", by the producer. That's
what I was refering to. They showed the kick in the movie also,
and yep, it didn't look like 30 feet at all.

'Curse' may be a good introductory bio for Bruce, but again, I was just disappointed by it. Some good stuff, but not enough for me to recommend it to anybody.

I've found the best bio on Bruce to be "Bruce Lee: Fighting Spirit", by Bruce Thomas. The only downside to that book is, unlike the other Lee bios, it has no pictures at all, if I remember correctly. However, most of the pictures seen in the other bios are pretty familiar to anyone who has read anything about Lee.

I've e-mailed A&E to see if a copy of their original Biography show on Lee exists. No response yet.

Cthulhu

Originally posted by Kirk
Nevertheless, it's impressive as all heck that he was kickin' butt so well without finishing his WC training.

I agree! Of course he also had his boxing. Still, I hadn't realized to what extent he had to innovate--I assumed that he had had the whole Wing Chun system.

Originally posted by arnisador



I agree! Of course he also had his boxing. Still, I hadn't realized to what extent he had to innovate--I assumed that he had had the whole Wing Chun system.

Maybe, but I don't think he had extensive boxing training while he lived in Hong Kong. I've only seen an account of one competition he had been in, which he won. I've yet to see any mention of bouts before or after.

He had some exposure to Tai Chi, from his father. His older brother, Peter, was also a fairly good fencer. I don't think he started doing serious analysis of boxing until he came to the U.S.

Cthulhu

According to Williem Cheung, one of the reasons Bruce experiemented so much was that he couldn't beat Cheung when they sparred. This drove Bruce nuts. Anybody who has seen any footage of bruce can tell he is a wee bit arrogant (not that it is that bad. To do what he did he kind of had to be). His inability to beat chueng and the fact that he did not have the complete system (or the real style) drove Bruce to compensate with what he picked up along the way.

Tony

I used to have that WC\JKD a comparison book. Probably still do if I was to look hard for it. Samurai sums it up nicely. The Wing Chun that W Cheung does is certainly demonstrative of only his style of WC, and Ted Wong fairly represents his style of JKD.

For an accurate comparison I'd advise a friendly crossing of hands with a practitioner of the other style. Some of the stuff that W Cheung does in that book makes me cringe...not a good representation of WC by and large. And his bit in the book where he shows how "modified" WC's tan sao fails where his "traditional" works is an absolute joke.

But worth a read.

The WC/JKD comparison book has been discussed on this board before and if I recall correctly others also felt that WC was not fairly represented.

I always thought of WC as a stand-in-one-place style, but as I've learned more I see WC practitioners moving around a lot.

Many people look at Wing Chun as a static method of fighting due to the first form. In Sil Lum Tao there is no footwork (other then assuming the first stance). This is the picture most people have of WC.

It is sort of intresting to note that Bruce Lee still taught Sil Lum Tao in Oakland, Seattle, and L.A. I guess he found merit in the form even as Jeet Kune Do was taking shape.

Thanks
Jeremy Bays

Now that you mention it I'm sure that's why I have had that impression.

Direwolf I would encourage you to go, since you are in Aust, to GM Cheungs school and trade hands with Dana Wong and see if his Tan Sao fails. IMHO taking 'typing shots' and a Wing Chun Grandmaster that studied directly with Yip Man shows very poor character.

Regards

Thanks for the reply, tilsonsifu. I would invite you to view the book in question and form your own opinions. In the book W Cheung is showing how a "modified" WC tan sao fails. Unfortunately the attack he defends against would never be intercepted with a tan sao, as it is coming in from almost ninety degrees to the side of the defender. Seeing as a tan sao extends forward along the centerline it makes about as much sense to use one in that situation as using a tor sao to block a descending hammerfist.

In regards to Dana Wong I have devoured and studied any article I have come across with him in. I have nothing but the greatest respect for the man. And I doubt that he would try and tan the attack in question. But as I said, read the book and draw your own conclusions.


IMHO taking 'typing shots' and a Wing Chun Grandmaster that studied directly with Yip Man shows very poor character.

I assume by 'typing shots' you mean criticising something I don't believe in? Perhaps my character would be poorer if I saw the example in question and said nothing out of respect for a man whose claims I do not respect. Far be it from me to insult anyone for their opinions, but perhaps it would be better if you researched the topic first? After reading the book please feel free to contact me and let me know how you went.

Peace

DW :asian:

dire wolf,



that quote at the bottom of your posts is hilarious, where did it come from?

Yeah it made me crack up when I read it too. I actually found it on a humour thread about eight months ago on Kung Fu Magazine Online forums. That's all I could remember of it...I'm sure there was more.

:yinyang:

Once again, Direwolf, please don't attack what you have been exposed to. I do have the book. This is ONE (p.89) of Traditional Wing Chun ways of handling the situation. This is a very basic, low level, requirement. With further study of the Sil Lum Tao form and the correct Chum Kil footwork this might make more since to you. If you have a chance to visit GM Cheungs school and study with Sifu Wong you would see and understand the footwork behind the principle of the Tan Sao in this situation. From the pictures I can see how it might be confusing. It is hard to see the full tan sao application for the situation in a couple of snap shots. Talk to your sifu and have him explain to you how to move your feet correctly maintain a centerline tan sao with an instant counter strike.

I didn't mean to sound rude in the last reply. If I did I apologize. That was not my intent. We are all Wing Chun brothers. I have just studied other systems of Wing Chun for years and GM Cheungs system, that I study now, just makes more since. The footwork really supports the system. Try it and see.

Thanks

Cheers mate. I will definately have a look at W Cheung's Wing Chun at some point in the future and I am always willing to keep the cup at least mostly empty.

Thanks for the clarification. All the best with your training,

DW

To answer the original question, It depends on the Instructor. I am a Wing Chun Sifu from a WT background and I have recently trained a little with Rick Young and I have attended a Dan Inasanto seminar. I must say that what they are teaching as Jun Fan and what I was taught and teach as Wing Chun are very similar. I have on the other hand seen Wing Chun that bears very little resemblance to Jun Fan.

In summary, The Jun Fan/Wing Chun comparrison comes down like so many things in the Martialk arts, It depends on the person teaching it and their personal experiences in the arts.

Regards,

Chunner

To answer a point made previously about tan sao and centerline - if the attack was coming from the side then the centerline just needs to be turned to face it. This is very easy with 'traditional' wing chun footwork which steps rather than pivots, and is one of the basic techniques taught in the first few month's training. tan sao as practised in SLT form teaches to face the point of contact - once applied with footwork that point could be anywhere in 180 degrees.
The neautral stance used in SLT is also the exact position of the feet in a front fighting stance, with the guard moved to the centerline, as opposed to the CENTRAL line that is used in the fighting stance.

Hi guys. Earlier in the thread you were discussing whether or not Bruce knew the second form of Wing Chun, Chum Kil.

When I was training with Patrick Strong, he told us that Bruce had taught him both Sil Lum Tao and Chum Kil, and that it was a regular part of the Seattle curriculum.

Cheers,
Alex

My first posting in this thread does state that Bruce Lee learned the first two empty-hand forms, which would be Sil Lum Tao and Chum Kil.

Cthulhu



Originally posted by TargetAlex

Hi guys. Earlier in the thread you were discussing whether or not Bruce knew the second form of Wing Chun, Chum Kil.

When I was training with Patrick Strong, he told us that Bruce had taught him both Sil Lum Tao and Chum Kil, and that it was a regular part of the Seattle curriculum.

Cheers,
Alex

A lot of what you guys have discussed is here http://www.blackbeltmag.com/archives/blackbelt/1982/dec82/cheung/cheung.html

Pack a lunch it is no quick read but it is good. I liked the part where Yip Man told them to go out and fight to test their techniques. Also Bruce Lee had trouble getting a passport because he was considered a street gang member according to this. It is one of the best articles I've read.

The original question was the difference between Jun Fan and Wing Chun and this article tells a lot.

I think the bottom line is Bruce Lee is the first person that cross trained. Who remembers Bo Jackson? Where did he get off getting credit for cross training, there should have been Bruce Lee Cross Trainers by Nike.

The story of wing chun is that it was developed to give the masses a quick effective way to fight so they could have a revolution. Over time the art was refined, polished and developed into a higher caliber martial art. This was done by useing techniques from other arts and an incredible amount of diligence. These masters that refined Wing Chun or any other art for that matter, were cut from the same mold as Lee. The wanted more, they wanted better, they didn't stop growing and learning as long as they were breathing.

Maybe it's a good thing Nike didn't come out with a pair of Bruce Lee Cross Trainers, they would be hard shoes to fill.:asian:

Sorry I was on a rant and forgot the rest of the story:
http://www.blackbeltmag.com/archives/blackbelt/1983/jan83/yipman/yipman.html
I'm sorry this is a 4 part article and I can't find the last 2.:disgust:

Hey,

I'm a WC practitioner from the Cheung lineage. I also trained at the Inosanto Academy for a little bit. There was a lot of difference. WC borders on being internal in the same fashion as Hsing I. Wing Chun techniques must all adhere to the principles and theories that are the foundation of the system.

In Jun Fan Wing Chun, which is not JKD, but like Cthulu said its predecessor, we didn't learn any forms. It was as if someone had learned some WC but just threw out the theories. The teachers suggested head level kicks to respond to punches. You could see the influence of the Sil Lim Tao and part of the Chum Kil, but the rest was very external and almost every suggested defense involved WAY more expending of energy than was necessary. I didn't realize how important the progression is in WC until I went there. The lack of the Bil Gee set makes Jun Fan Wing Chun very different. Kickboxing moves and round punches were literally and very obviously grafted into the system. It was eventually one of the reasons I left the IA. Don't get me wrong, they teach good stuff in that class, but if you know WC, then it would feel like a step in the wrong direction everytime you went to class. It was very flashy and WC is not flashy at all.

I've read the Cheung/Wong book and it's a decent read but very simplified so as to reach a wider audience. It's just a generalized read.

And the Tan Sao failing was something that used to happen with practitioners of another WC group who I was friendly with in college when we would get together to compare notes and do some light sparring. They did attempt that very defense, but usually in response to a secondary attack, never the first attack.

I see jkd people in articles and such talk of bruce lee and him creating jkd as an improvement , advancement etc. Regardless of how good he may have been just because wing chun as he experienced it wasnt for him doesn't make it any less valid. for anybody else. I have met people who were quick to expose bruce lees philisophy, or believe that training in a " traditional " style was too rigid, yet have no frame of reference except magazine interviews, and movie clips.
I have not "tried" jkd, but I think some people may believe it to be a shortcut, which isnt there. There is no escaping having to practice punchs, kicks and footwork thousands of times for years to become a good martial artist.
So to me the real question is does jkd make you a better fighter or martial artist than wing chun? or make you a better fighter/ martial artist in a shorter period of time?
How long does it take to complete the system of jkd( if thats possible)? Is there a required body of knowlege comparable to the sil lum tao, chum kui, bil jee, and weapons sets of wing chun that define the art?
Some people believe jkd is the best thing since slice bread and maybe it is but why? Because bruce lee created it? Or are the principles more sound?

I've always said that to truly experience the benefits JKD training can offer, you first need to have some years of experience in a 'traditional' or 'classical' system. Even though he was kicked out before learning the whole system, Lee did spend about five years training with Yip Man. Nearly all of his early students came from a traditional MA background, like karate, judo, or kenpo.

Unfortunately, many people seem to take up JKD without any traditional MA background, and thus cannot get a decent appreciation of escaping the 'classical mess'. How can someone escape something they've never been bound by?

For the record, I happen to enjoy traditional MA very much :p

Cthulhu

I was reading all these threads and didn't see one reference to Wong Shun Lung. Didn't he and Bruce have a close relationship? If they did (I thought they did) wouldn't that account for Bruce's interest in western boxing? More so that he was tired of philosophy? Anyways just my $.02.
-David