EPAK and JKD

[Doc]

Well on the face it may sound like a good idea, but who controls it? Why should some bozo who got his black belt through a video course be considered "in the fraternity' for life. How about the guy who studied with the guy at the strip mall? You know the twenty-five year old 8th degree who created his own style, and promoted a bunch of his students to black belt? Without standards in what is essentially a business marketplace, none of it holds water. All you can do is look at the head(s) of organizations, the product(s) they produce, and the integrity they bring to what they do. And that's why I won't do "distance learning" or make a buck first over controlling the quality and standards of student participants. We have one standard. Meet it or move to a standard you can meet. We call it "Integrity Through Excellence." Simply by promoting uncompromising excellence, integrity is assured and it defacto weeds out those that don't belong. For some our standards are too high. Maybe for some they are too low. A student will always seek their own level. A high school secondary education or move on to a prestigious college, or somewhere in between. That's the way life works, after all; everybody can't get an "A." Some are just happy to not get an "F." The majority are just "C's." That why they call it average. We don't take average students.

Oh yeah,
A certain segment of academia created "grading on the curve" to justify mediocrity. After they suceeded in dumbing everyone down with that brainstorm, they switched to "social promotions." Translation; "He's been around awhile so let's move him up." Sound familiar? Not in my house.

 

[eyebeams]

Grading curves set median grades based on departmental or administrative preferences to ensure consistent marking between instructors at a given university or department in classes with a threshold number of students (Harvard uses 30) to apply statistical significance.

In fact, grading curves are a common method to prevent grade inflation. The curve does not have the purpose you imply it does; it lowers opportunities for high grades as well as increases some low grades.

Grade inflation is a continuing problem, and has been for decades. See:

http://www.azstarnet.com/grades/1928.html

As you can see, that occurred 70 years ago, largely because instructors ignored the curve and its limits on upper level grades.

Social promotion is an interesting case. You imply that students are simply upped into he next grade, but this isn't actually the case. Different boards use different strategies. Age-grade coincides with supplemental studies when the program is properly implemented, and on the flipside, grade skipping tends to also be limited. In both cases, supplementary material is applied to the individual student's curriculum, either as a remedial method or to provide additional challenges.

Academic pactices are not generally based solely on sentiment or tradition. They are based on academic analysis linked to the issues that come up in actual institutions. Casually judging them is problematic, and likely to come up with inaccurate generalizations. Applying them to martial arts is likely to be even more problematic.

While a veneer of academic clout may be tempting, martial arts knowledge is primarily demonstrative -- i.e, we know somebody is skilled because they can actually do something and practically apply their knowledge. In education, this is actually considered a viable third alternative to rigid testing and individualized study, both of which have problems. Fortunately, martial arts schools are not bound by the time constrainst and scale of traditional education.

I think that usually, it's the arts that emphasize doing that maintain consistent standards. I note, for instance, that BJJ belt and Judo belts rarely experience questions about their competency. A BJJ blue has demonstrated what he knows repeatedly against live opponents. If a practitioner from demonstration-based art knows his stuff, *you* also know.

The only problem this creates is that demonstrations must be broad enough to encompass the full curriculum of a given art. I would go further to say that testing reflects the values of that art. In my case, I would trust the guy who can apply principles in an effective way and share them with another to the extent that they can do the same, over someone who studies something with more theoretical depth, but whose primary demonstrations have been static scenarios, essays and the use of art-related terminology.

 

[evenflow1121]

A lot of the concepts may seem similar, but a lot of the stuff in both systems are totally different from each other. Just choose what you like, if you prefer JKD go for it.

 

[Brother John]

Very well said sir. When Bruce died there was a mad scramble (sounds familiar) to commercialize JKD which has no structure. That is why there is usually someone's name attached to all the variations of JKD Concepts. The funny thing is it's number one student concentrates on Silat and Kali. Does that tell you something?

Thanks for the compliment, and TRUE:.. D. Inosanto does seem to focus on the Kali/Silat arts.....so then most don't see JKD as "looking" like anything else. To those two you mentioned I'd add a third: Thai Boxing. Those three together is how most modern "JKD" schools/clubs move...period. Which I think, by the definitions that Bruce Lee wrote out, is just another rut. I think that many would, if they didn't Know their credentials, look down their noses at the way.......say.......Jerry Poteet's "JKD" is expressed through more "Wing-Chun`ish" movement or Larry Hartsell's "JKD" through his grappling prowess.
But: They do express JKD very well also, just not the popular flavor (rut) of the day.

Your Brother
John

 

[Hudson69]

I am an EPAK student and a fan of JKD/Bruce Lee so take this with a grain of salt.

To me it seems like a then end result is pretty much the same; free response to a given situation. The road to get there however seems to be different.

Kenpo for me is a set techniques for a given situation but as time goes on and you are advancing it is ingrained more and more that these are "sterile" attack-response situations in which ideally this is how it will happen. Kenpo techniques are used as the vehicle to teach you to be able to respond and adapt as the situation changes with the ultimate goal to free from the use of any technique per se. This understanding can come at any time but real freedom probably wont occur until deep into the system/training; use of sparring is one of the best tools for this since you have 2 or more people "fighting/resisting" without a script.

JKD seems to be (remember I have never trained in JKD) simpler techniques or less movements; like the longer, more advanced Kenpo techniques separted into smaller sub parts with the same goal in mind; free response to a situation. JKD seems to have more potential to make you a better street fighter faster due to the earlier emphasis on shorter "techniques" taught to situations with more emphasis on flexibility but overall fighting ability is up in the air and depends on the student not the art/system/training.

For me the Kenpo has worked really well and absolutely compliments every other system of self defense I have ever studied, especially my LEO Combatives.

Would anyone from a JKD background comment on my JKD statements so if I am off it can be corrected?

 

[Doc]

I am an EPAK student and a fan of JKD/Bruce Lee so take this with a grain of salt.

To me it seems like a then end result is pretty much the same; free response to a given situation. The road to get there however seems to be different.

Kenpo for me is a set techniques for a given situation but as time goes on and you are advancing it is ingrained more and more that these are "sterile" attack-response situations in which ideally this is how it will happen. Kenpo techniques are used as the vehicle to teach you to be able to respond and adapt as the situation changes with the ultimate goal to free from the use of any technique per se. This understanding can come at any time but real freedom probably wont occur until deep into the system/training; use of sparring is one of the best tools for this since you have 2 or more people "fighting/resisting" without a script.

JKD seems to be (remember I have never trained in JKD) simpler techniques or less movements; like the longer, more advanced Kenpo techniques separted into smaller sub parts with the same goal in mind; free response to a situation. JKD seems to have more potential to make you a better street fighter faster due to the earlier emphasis on shorter "techniques" taught to situations with more emphasis on flexibility but overall fighting ability is up in the air and depends on the student not the art/system/training.

For me the Kenpo has worked really well and absolutely compliments every other system of self defense I have ever studied, especially my LEO Combatives.

Would anyone from a JKD background comment on my JKD statements so if I am off it can be corrected?

What you say is essentially correct sir, but it really depends on the flavor or instructor of Kenpo of which you speak. I know in my line, we have the "JKD-Like" street sparring as an integral part of the training process, and it is codified within the structure. We refer to these as our SL-3 or Dictionary Technique component, and it must be functional before you even begin to see more complex material.

But keep in mind there are limitations to the JKD Concept because there are many elements that cannot be addressed free-formed in a sparring environment. The difference is JKD doesn't in general supplement their "sparring" with the elements of what we call our "Encyclopedia Techniques," where the real knowledge is contained. Street Sparring can develop limited skills as it is designed to do, but the knowledge of the art is embedded and archived in the more traditional self-defense techniques. Being a "Kenpo-Karate" (EPAK is actually a misnomer), student will give you one, but not the other depending on who teaches you.

An art must have both, and both should be functional and effective allowing a flow from one to the other, predicated on circumstances.

 

[James Kovacich]

What you say is essentially correct sir, but it really depends on the flavor or instructor of Kenpo of which you speak. I know in my line, we have the "JKD-Like" street sparring as an integral part of the training process, and it is codified within the structure. We refer to these as our SL-3 or Dictionary Technique component, and it must be functional before you even begin to see more complex material.

But keep in mind there are limitations to the JKD Concept because there are many elements that cannot be addressed free-formed in a sparring environment. The difference is JKD doesn't in general supplement their "sparring" with the elements of what we call our "Encyclopedia Techniques," where the real knowledge is contained. Street Sparring can develop limited skills as it is designed to do, but the knowledge of the art is embedded and archived in the more traditional self-defense techniques. Being a "Kenpo-Karate" (EPAK is actually a misnomer), student will give you one, but not the other depending on who teaches you.

An art must have both, and both should be functional and effective allowing a flow from one to the other, predicated on circumstances.

Nice post Doc,

The only technical flaw I see is that your view of "your" Kenpo can also apply to "some" of the better JKD instructors. To see JKD as a "concept" or just a martial art, either way is only half right. In JKD, without the arts foundation (art) their are no concepts and vice versa. Two halves of the whole, neither complete without the other.

That last 2 sentences are and will continue to be argued till the grave and that argument is JKD's "cancer." Like many arts, in JKD there are good and bad, strong and weak instructors. But your post referring to Kenpo can be also apllied to the JKD instructors that "get it."

 

[Doc]

Nice post Doc,

The only technical flaw I see is that your view of "your" Kenpo can also apply to "some" of the better JKD instructors. To see JKD as a "concept" or just a martial art, either way is only half right. In JKD, without the arts foundation (art) their are no concepts and vice versa. Two halves of the whole, neither complete without the other.

That last 2 sentences are and will continue to be argued till the grave and that argument is JKD's "cancer." Like many arts, in JKD there are good and bad, strong and weak instructors. But your post referring to Kenpo can be also apllied to the JKD instructors that "get it."

Keep in mind that JKD's premier teacher, Danny Inosanto, actually concentrates on Kali, Silat, & Escrima. JKD was never created to be a style or system but only a training/learning concept according to Bruce. That is why there is no real curriculum or structure. But as you say, like with any art, the teacher only with his knowledge and experience makes all the difference.

 

[K831]

The “Kenpo-Karate” & JKD Connection



Ed Parker’s creation, “Kenpo-Karate,” has a brother and a sister art. The “sister” is Jeet Kune Do (JKD). We’ll save the “brother” for another day.

I have to ask... what is the "brother" art?

 

[Tames D]

i have to ask... What is the "brother" art?

kfss

 

[Doc]

kfss

KFSS and Limalama.

 

[K831]

Limalama or Kaju would have been my guess. I hadn't considered KFSS.

Any reason for the feminine/masculine designation?