the real JKD

Could you define "real JKD" then? I feel like that would be a helpful start. Because your contention is that it's hard to find "good" JKD (which may very well be true), but how you're defining "good" is surely shaped by how you're defining "real."

For the record, I don't regard myself as a JKD person. I'm more involved in FMA. That said, Guro Dan is the reason I got into FMA to begin with. I say that because I want to be clear that I'm not setting up a counterargument. I'm not an "original JKD" person laying a trap or anything. I'm just curious.

Thanks BtRH.
 
Could you define "real JKD" then? I feel like that would be a helpful start. Because your contention is that it's hard to find "good" JKD (which may very well be true), but how you're defining "good" is surely shaped by how you're defining "real."

For the record, I don't regard myself as a JKD person. I'm more involved in FMA. That said, Guro Dan is the reason I got into FMA to begin with. I say that because I want to be clear that I'm not setting up a counterargument. I'm not an "original JKD" person laying a trap or anything. I'm just curious.

Thanks BtRH.
The real JKD is from Guru Dan
 
The real JKD is from Guru Dan
If that's the only metric of real JKD, then why is it so hard to find? There are plenty of teachers operating in the world who trace their lineage back to Guro Dan. Are you then drawing a distinction between "real JKD" and "good teachers of real JKD"?
 
I trained under Guro Dan, then under Ted Lucay Lucay. Dan Sullivan was teaching here in Irvine up until 2023 in believe. His school was OC Kickboxing.

I’m not sure what you mean exactly. Are they not teaching the curriculum or are they simply not good teachers. Not all good practitioners make good teachers.
 
I trained under Guro Dan, then under Ted Lucay Lucay. Dan Sullivan was teaching here in Irvine up until 2023 in believe. His school was OC Kickboxing.

I’m not sure what you mean exactly. Are they not teaching the curriculum or are they simply not good teachers. Not all good practitioners make good teachers.
After my many training sessions with Guru Dan i now have come to the conclusion that I must open my own school
I feel disappointed by other "Sifus "
 
After my many training sessions with Guru Dan i now have come to the conclusion that I must open my own school
I feel disappointed by other "Sifus "
After my many training sessions with Guru Dan i now have come to the conclusion that I must open my own school
I feel disappointed by other "Sifus "
Assuming that you're certified by Guro Dan to teach, what would you do differently than other teachers?
 
Teach pure JKD not a watered down version
IMO, a watered down MA system is a MA system that cannot help their students to develop a solid foundation. One possibility can be the instructor himself hasn't developed that solid foundation yet.

So, in your opinion, what are the "solid foundation" in the JKD system?
 
Teach pure JKD not a watered down version
As soon as you allow one of your students to teach, the original art is, in some way ‘watered down’. Only Bruce Lee should be allowed to teach JKD because that’s the purist, unadulterated form of JKD.
 
Teach pure JKD not a watered down version
So... this is entirely up to you, of course. But these terse, unspecific answers don't make a lot of sense to me. You started this discussion. But you don't seem to actually want to have it.

Understanding that Guro Dan has been my inspiration in martial arts since the mid 80s, some might say that his approach (JKD Concepts for lack of a better term) is watered down JKD in comparison with the "Original JKD" of folks like Ted Wong.

Guro Dan's JKD family were the reason that things like muay thai, pentjak silat, kali, savate, and other influences are present in the JKD gene pool. Do you feel those influences have watered it down? Or is it a training approach you've witnessed that waters it down?

So how would you approach JKD from your background with Guro Dan while avoiding that watering down effect? What would you teach?
 
As soon as you allow one of your students to teach, the original art is, in some way ‘watered down’. Only Bruce Lee should be allowed to teach JKD because that’s the purist, unadulterated form of JKD.
I consider the teachings directly from Guru Dan to be the purest JKD
Him & Bruce formed the nucleus of the ultimate JKD, all the other teachings are just watered down interpretations
 
You will have a bit of trouble trying to get students who want your JKD (assuming you find people looking for pure JKD) if you're not able to actually explain what makes your JKD the pure JKD. What makes the other teachings watered down interpretations if they also come from Dan, and how are you preventing that yourself?
 
You will have a bit of trouble trying to get students who want your JKD (assuming you find people looking for pure JKD) if you're not able to actually explain what makes your JKD the pure JKD. What makes the other teachings watered down interpretations if they also come from Dan, and how are you preventing that yourself?
I don't need to explain..they'll learn by doing
 
The problem with defining JKD is that to teach this "formless form," there must be some form/curriculum to explain and pass down, i.e., a "style."

Since Lee expressed it to be always evolving, the only pure Bruce Lee JKD is what he actually taught during his lifetime. If you teach the art after that and stay true to Lee's concept of continual evolution and self-expression, it is no longer his JKD, but that of the current practitioner.

One can say that JKD is a set of biomechanic principles and as long as that's taught, it's real JKD, but other striking arts follow the same principles so it's not so unique.
 
Back
Top