EPAK and JKD

[cdhall]

Someone brought this up somewhere but I can't find it so I'm starting a thread.

I've had this issue come up before. If I move and can't find an EPAK school what else should I study?

I was told that Jeet Kune Do would be good because of their lack of a formal curriculum and the compatibility of their concepts to Kenpo concepts.

What's the word?

P.S. This is my 100th post!

 

[Goldendragon7]

JKD as I understand it, is wide open to variation with little standardization..... Kenpo is highly variable also but has been organized much more for the beginner and outlined better for the advanced student. I find JKD haphazard, yet it does have its great points.

just my view
:asian:

 

[Zoran]

I would have to agree with GD7....again.

Although, if I could not find a Kenpo school to train at. I would choose a JKD because it would allow me more freedom to do what I do. Plus I'd pick up a thing or two that I could integrate into my personal style.

If you look at it from that point of view, maybe it would be good to join JKD, if there is no Kenpo.

Similar-No
Compatible-Yes

 

[cdhall]

That is kind of what I was thinking Zoran.
I asked Mr. Parker Jr. about this once at a seminar.
Maybe Mr. C will elaborate a bit on whether they achieve the same end goal relative to how student a "master" of each style would be and what affect if any the development of the curriculum for franchised schools had on the differences between EPAK and JKD.

How about what Mr. Parker taught in 1964 +/- vs what he taught in 1990.

 

[eternalwhitebelt]

actually there is a standard lesson plan for jun fan, which is the base art of jkd. every one starts off learning the same tools. The advanced jkd student can indeed take the art to different places, hence the differences seen, but they all ( or at least as it is outlined by dan inosanto) start from the same curriculum. JKD is the personal expression of man in combat. Much like kenpo you are taught many things and the art is then tailored to you. In Jkd the principals and rules of motion are the kings of the system. kenpo is a fantastic base art, it is very easy to adapt to other systems. rules of motion are universal. It has been my experience that a lot of the very effective systems are more similar than different. things are just explained differently.

 

[Kempojujutsu]

I believe Jkd and Epak are from the same bloodlines. Several of Ed's Black Belts went on to train in Jkd. Dan Inosanto, Larry Hartsell, I know there are more. I seen it in a book on JKD it had around 10 of Bruce's best students. About half of them came from EPAK. Bruce and Ed had many talks or meetings with each other. I am sure they didn't talk about the weather.
Bob :asian:

 

[Kirk]

I've heard a comment that the difference between Wing Chun
and EPAK are that WC was started by a 90 lb female nun, and
EPAK was started by a 200 some lb. male Hawaiin. Meaning
to imply that the two styles have a lot of commonalities. The
same could be said for JKD, since WC was Bruce Lee's first style.
As an inexperienced student, not "in the know" the two when
executed look VERY similar to me.

 

[Goldendragon7]

As in many systems..... there are always some similarities however Wing Chun and EPAK are quite different..... from the floor up. Often times in AK we "use" different drills from WC but as a complete system no comparison.

:asian:

 

[satans.barber]

Originally posted by Kirk

I've heard a comment that the difference between Wing Chun
and EPAK are that WC was started by a 90 lb female nun, and
EPAK was started by a 200 some lb. male Hawaiin. Meaning
to imply that the two styles have a lot of commonalities. The
same could be said for JKD, since WC was Bruce Lee's first style.
As an inexperienced student, not "in the know" the two when
executed look VERY similar to me.

They do look similar to the untrained eye, but if you have a little knowledge the differences become evident quickly.

To me, Wing Chun seems to lack the flexibility of kenpo. Priciples such as the immovable elbow make the movements very quick but quite rigid (from my perception). Wing Chun against Wing Chun works OK, but I'm not sure it stands up to more fluid styles, which was basically what Bruce Lee said as well.

In kenpo you're free to move as you like, I think it offers the choice that Wing Chun doesn't.

Not that I'm knocking Wing Chun of course, far from it, some of the blocks from it that aren't taught in Kenpo I use myself, and it's extremely well put together and very impressive. Some of the more philosophical aspect that are impressed on Kung Fu students but are lacking from the kenpo diet are also worth reading about.

I just get the feeling that sparring in a Wing Chun school you'd get 'not like that, have you arm there....no....another inch closer to your sternum' all the time from the sensei, where as we don't get that (at our place anyway). If you're a good fighter, you're a good fighter, if you have your elbow in a different place to everyone else, but it works to your advantage, then so be it. People should learn to exploit their own strengths and defend their own weaknesses, so trying to make people do exactly the same thing is never going to work. There needs to be some leeway there that isn't always evident in more traditional styles.

To be honest, I think I'm a JKD man at heart!

(Above is my 2p, people will disagree...!)

Ian.

 

[ikenpo]

Originally posted by cdhall

Someone brought this up somewhere but I can't find it so I'm starting a thread.

I've had this issue come up before. If I move and can't find an EPAK school what else should I study?

I was told that Jeet Kune Do would be good because of their lack of a formal curriculum and the compatibility of their concepts to Kenpo concepts.

What's the word?

P.S. This is my 100th post!

I would say the flow is similar. That's why when Kenpo guys do JKD they are like wow that guy is a quick learner. When in actuality there responses are similar to techniques we do. Good instructors have a base and understand their logic behind the movement like Kenpo, but they don't have as good of a promotion structure (no belts, just whoever can pretty much teach it) so beware of who you train under. In my humble opinion. Also there aren't any basics as we know them. Simply drills from points of reference (most of which I do like).

If I had the chance I would definitely train with a Dan Inosanto, Erik Paulson, Larry Hartsell, James Keating, Kelly Worden, Ron Baliciki or Paul Vunak in a second. But I wouldn't choose them over any one of my favorite Kenpo instructors.

It also depends where your at in the US. There is some good stuff out there that you might also find you can incorporate into your Kenpo. Some suggestions I would make, if in NY Vee Jujitsu or Sanuces Ryu. Maybe some Hawaiian Jujitsu (great stuff) or Brazillian Jujitsu. Wally Jay's Small Circle would work as well and Modern Arnis would give you freedom and structure. And we haven't even gotten into the Filipino arts....

jb:asian:

 

[Kirk]

Originally posted by jbkenpo

Simply drills from points of reference (most of which I do like).

Could expand on this? What do you mean by 'points of
reference'?

 

[ikenpo]

Originally posted by Kirk



Could expand on this? What do you mean by 'points of
reference'?

Like Hubud and other trapping drills...

 

[eternalwhitebelt]

actually they do have basics. think about it. you can't have drills without any basics. most people who talk about jkd have never truely studied it. jkd is not the base art, jun fan is. most people don't know this. what you see as jkd is the personal expression of a person's basics.

 

[ikenpo]

Originally posted by eternalwhitebelt

actually they do have basics. think about it. you can't have drills without any basics. most people who talk about jkd have never truely studied it. jkd is not the base art, jun fan is. most people don't know this. what you see as jkd is the personal expression of a person's basics.

I'll defer to your expertise because I certainly am not one. My experience with Jun Fan is that most people don't do it. They are on the JKD Concept side (which was my exposure) and I realize this is a raging debate, much like who does real EPAK or 24 vs 16 tech systems or MK vs Adv Kenpo concepts.

Even with the Chris Kent stuff I have on video I never saw any basics per se unless were talking about pad drills and P.O.R. (point of reference) drills. If so then yes they have basics.

jb:asian:

 

[Rob_Broad]

While the 2 styles compliment each other I find there to be worlds of difference between them.

 

[Goldendragon7]

Jkd does have some areas of interest and good ideas that compliments AK but I still prefer the completeness of AK.

:asian:

 

[Kirk]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7

Jkd does have some areas of interest and good ideas that compliments AK but I still prefer the completeness of AK.

:asian:

I think we all do ... otherwise we'd be JKDers ... I'll do any drill
that will help develop my kenpo skills.

 

[brianhunter]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7

Jkd does have some areas of interest and good ideas that compliments AK but I still prefer the completeness of AK.

:asian:

I agree....I was at the book store the other day and looked at some "JKD" books and in my non expert opinion I did not see anything in there that you could get from EPAK.....To me it would almost seem like if you started JKD you would end up in EPAK due to its actual completeness as a system and not really being a study theory which i view JKD as

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Good for you Brian, you just won the cupie doll. If you've already figured these things out already with your limited time, you'll definitely be one of the better Kenpoists if you stay with it. I've been told from an original student of Bruce (Bob Bremer, original nucleus) when he was watching me teach that I was doing JKD. I told him it was Kenpo, plain and simple, if it looked like JKD, that was fine too.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[Goldendragon7]

Oh my gawd!!!!!!!