The truth of JKD finally revealed!

FatDragon

White Belt
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
1
Reaction score
1
For those who haven't read Teri Tom's book, "The Straight Lead: The Core of Bruce Lee's Jun Fan Jeet Kune Do", I would strongly recommend it. She is a board member of the Bruce Lee Foundation and long time student of, and certified instructor under, Ted Wong (the man who spent more personal time with Bruce than any of the other original students).

First a quote from Bruce on JKD: "Only one of 10,000 can handle it. It is complete martial art. Complete offensive attacks. It is silly to think almost anyone can learn it."

Ted Wong asked Bruce what he meant in that quote. Bruce said that most people lack the discipline to learn the simple techniques found in JKD, and keep practicing those techniques over and over and over again, knowing that you will never achieve true perfection. Bruce said the average martial arts student is more confident in learning stances, punches, and set patterns of attack and defense. But when it comes time to use this in a real fight, they are defeated by their own "classical mess".

Here are some things from the book that reveal the truth of JKD. After reading, you will understand that most of the schools claiming to teach JKD today are completely bogus. In fact, in reading the first statement you can see that one of the most famous JKD "instructors" has bastardized Bruce's system.

"JKD is NOT kali, escrima, or "27" arts"

For over 30 years, certain so-called JKD instructors have been teaching techniques that were never developed or practiced by Bruce Lee. In some cases, they have taken certain arts like kali and escrima, and misrepresented them as JKD. Nowhere in Bruce Lee's writings will you find notes on kali or escrima techniques. In fact, nowhere in Bruce Lee's private notes will you find an in-depth analysis of any arts other than Western fencing and boxing, and in earlier years, Wing Chun. If he briefly mentioned other arts, it was to understand their strengths and shortcomings, so that he could find ways to defeat them. There is no such thing as "JKD blend", as some instructors have claimed.

"JKD is not Wing Chun"

JKD is NOT a modified version of Wing Chun, as some have misrepresented it. Yes, Bruce initially studied Wing Chun. But remember, this was early in his development as a fighter. Anyone who's seen backyard training footage of Bruce knows that, by the late 60's, he'd traded his Wing Chun dummy for the heavy bag.

As noted in a letter to William Cheung (note: she is referring to a letter mentioned in an earlier part of the book), Bruce had stopped practicing Wing Chun by 1967. Some Wing Chun instructors like to claim that Wing Chun is the foundation of Jeet Kune Do and that Bruce merely expanded upon it. WRONG! He had all but abandoned it. Its shortcomings are what forced him to look for a completely different way of fighting. All of this is clearly documented in Bruce's letter to Cheung. JKD is different from Wing Chun structurally, mechanically, the footwork, etc.

"JKD is not boxing"

While Bruce may have discarded Wing Chun for the western arts of fencing and boxing, JKD is not a simplified version of those arts either. To the untrained eye, it may appear as though Jeet Kune Do is nothing more than a fancy name for boxing or kickboxing. This is a common misconception not helped by the fact that, for years, certain people have been teaching what is essentially kickboxing and passing it off as JKD. A few of the things seperating JKD from boxing/kickboxing is the stance, strong side forward, thumbs up punching techniques, range of fighting, etc.

"Having No Form" versus Having "No-Form"

Over the years many have misinterpreted Bruce's words regarding "no way as way". They practice and teach whatever and then call it JKD. As a result, the actual techniques that Bruce developed are being lost. Failure to master the basic laws of leverage, body position, balance, footwork, and so forth is what Bruce termed "having no form". In other words, ignorance. "No-form", on the other hand, is that level of executing techniques to such perfection that doing so no longer requires thought. (As in the quote from Enter The Dragon..."when there is an opening, I do not hit, it hits all by itself").

JKD is both a philosophy AND a system that Bruce continued to refine until his untimely death. Over the years, some have misinterpreted Bruce's words regarding personal expression to mean "anything goes"-that by taking a little bit of this and a little of that from many different arts, they are then practicing JKD. Ironically, this leads to the very surface knowledge and mechanical conditioning that Bruce was railing against.

And for further evidence of Bruce being against the incorporation of other arts into his JKD system, refer to page 50 of Commentaries on the Martial Way and read the tale of X and Y. That was taken from a letter written by Bruce to his student Jerry Poteet, who wanted to mix JKD drills with kenpo karate. Obviously, Bruce objected.
 

Robert Lee

Brown Belt
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
425
Reaction score
6
The truth has been around for a very long time. the problem is the people that have not studied JKD at all. Or have trained little in it. Wing chun still shows in JKD just not as much. JKd took on Wing chun, western Boxing. from Ali. patterson And dempsey. Then fenceing JKD concepts is the concept look at other arts. But if you want to train JF/JKD you can and not have to train the other aspects. At several concept schools. The 1 in 10,000 is that to understand you have to let go to get it ,it being your JKD after you have trained it. Jkd has a method to learn by then in live performance that is what you do as your JKD. Politics way heavy about JKD because it is missunderstood to be most any thing By the words take what is useful . That was meant to be withing the JKD training. Now modern aspects say yes look around Add what you need take away what you do not. But that is not any longer JKD other then your OWN personal use not what should be taught as JKD to others. As they need to find there own either through just JKD tools or other tools that help them only. Which has allways meant JKD is the art founded and taught during Bruces lifetime. But Should evolve to For the person now that we do have more exposer then was around back when Bruce was alive. keep it near what Bruce taught. But agin do not condem the personal side for each.
 

Jimi

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
542
Reaction score
11
Location
Beltsville, MD
I respect Ted Wong as much as many other original students of Si Jo Li Jun Fan (Bruce Lee). To infer that this instructor who was certified by Bruce to teach his art is bastardizing JKD because he also offers Kali, and other arts sounds kind of bias against that instructor(any need to mention names?) I have no issue with Ted Wong and his right to teach JKD, and his ablilties stand on their own, but I doubt that he has the exclusive to teach JKD. Why doubt another mans right to teach JKD as well. I believe Bruce would be happy with what both of his students & friends have done to share. Why detract from what someone else does? I do think Bruce may haved frowned on that, but I can not speak for Bruce. I absolutely believe Ted Wong has the right to teach what and how he sees fit, and so does this instructor who supposedly is bastardizing Bruces work. Both instructors and others believe deeply in Bruces work, I repeat, I do not believe either have the sole exclusive to JKD. If you do not believe this other instructor should be teaching JKD, don't train with him, and advance with what you can with who you do believe in. Detracting from a certified instructor of JKD from Si Jo Bruce himself does no one any good. Train hard and uphold what Bruce believed in, don't bicker that my Sifu is better than your Sifu, sounds like Kung Fu Theater. PEACE
 

Robert Lee

Brown Belt
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
425
Reaction score
6
Jimi said:
I respect Ted Wong as much as many other original students of Si Jo Li Jun Fan (Bruce Lee). To infer that this instructor who was certified by Bruce to teach his art is bastardizing JKD because he also offers Kali, and other arts sounds kind of bias against that instructor(any need to mention names?) I have no issue with Ted Wong and his right to teach JKD, and his ablilties stand on their own, but I doubt that he has the exclusive to teach JKD. Why doubt another mans right to teach JKD as well. I believe Bruce would be happy with what both of his students & friends have done to share. Why detract from what someone else does? I do think Bruce may haved frowned on that, but I can not speak for Bruce. I absolutely believe Ted Wong has the right to teach what and how he sees fit, and so does this instructor who supposedly is bastardizing Bruces work. Both instructors and others believe deeply in Bruces work, I repeat, I do not believe either have the sole exclusive to JKD. If you do not believe this other instructor should be teaching JKD, don't train with him, and advance with what you can with who you do believe in. Detracting from a certified instructor of JKD from Si Jo Bruce himself does no one any good. Train hard and uphold what Bruce believed in, don't bicker that my Sifu is better than your Sifu, sounds like Kung Fu Theater. PEACE
The instructor You are talking about is not taking away from JKD as I see it. concepts Are applications that are meant to enhance knowledge performance and the inuvidual finds in those what they take. And this instructor As I am aware of will hand down a pure type Of JKD if a person show they are ready and willing to learn. And this person was given a burden when Bruce passed that many wanted to learn JKd but he made a promise And has tryed to live by that promise. The way it is now is we have Jun fan// JKD being offered Then we have concepts that can bring a person to there needs. And those concepts the people do not have to learn JKD if they choose not to. The problem is the politics. To much of that then the people who add this and that and want to say that is JKD with out ever taking one real JKD lesson. If a person wants to put something in there JKD that they have trained. It is there choice. But then its only theres not really JKD as even This instructor you have pointed out Offers As Jun fan// JKD. But yes it would be personal JKD . Politics has taken its toll on JKD. Any way you look at it. If a person does Any M/A at all and finds some kind of useful aspects that they are able to improve what they do Thats great. and if a person Goes the concept way fine or the what is now callled OJKD way fine to. Both ways You will If JKD is waht you want to train You will learn The other arts are the concepts but JKD is still JKD. Any way the world knows that This instructor is the real deal Look what he has done to promote JKD and several other arts over the years.
 

Calm Intention

Orange Belt
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
89
Reaction score
10
Hi(I'm a newbie),

I knew a fella way back in 78-79 period who trained in JKD(I think he mentioned a school in Dallas, TX), and he knew Bruce's art and philosophy in its pure sense(so I thought, having read some material- but no training), and claimed to have trained with someone from affilitated with the original school. This guy knew the energy drills, sticky hands, trapping, etc. I really dug that.
He also warned me as far back as then, about those corrupting what Master Lee was about.

I noted the comments 'take what is useful', and 'no way as way', and those are some of the central themes of his philosophy as I remember.

I would add that meaning tends to get lost in its translation, and the 'word' doesn't necessarily convey things properly.
I'm almost certain Bruce mentioned that you must 'feel intrinsically'(like a Zen of Knowing) what he was trying to say.

Regarding 'bastardization'. I wonder how someone who so believed in 'adaptability'(take what is useful), would view things today, as opposed to 3 decades earlier. I think he'd apprecitate the evolution of adaptability for its own sake; but I'm 100% certain he'd want to test it out for effectiveness.

I also think he'd be right in there with the U.F.C. head-bangers, though I personally don't approve the U.F.C. for what it stands for(anti-disciplinary, and offering a purse thru its commercialization).
 

Robert Lee

Brown Belt
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
425
Reaction score
6
Take what is useful means after you have trained in JKD and have found the useful tools that work for you that is your JKD. Not take what is useful from several arts and then call that JKD. the way of no way. You are not bound by method of delivery. prearranged selfdefence aspects to certion attack or defence methods. If you have to bite your opponent you bite him. . Now to evolve yes if you notice through exposer to other methods A usefulness that you want to applie to your method No one is stopping you from that. But do not just add and add. to add means you need to look at what you need to take away. Concepts leaves you with your understanding of what best meets your needs. That is good is it JKD well know its concepts. Is it if you trained JKD then put a little something in the mix to enhance your performance. Both yes and no. Yes its now your personal aspect for you. No it is not JKD as you should hand down to others. Because you alone made that mix. Yes you can relate it to others in concepts. So they can add or not to there own JKD But agin as you add theres a part that has to go away as adding means you found something that better meets the need. the other then is not needed. JKD is personal after you train. Thats its freedom you by then have found the tools that best meet your needs. the training method guides the learning the live performance finds the persons needs.
 

Calm Intention

Orange Belt
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
89
Reaction score
10
Robert Lee said:
1.Take what is useful means after you have trained in JKD and have found the useful tools that work for you that is your JKD. Not take what is useful from several arts and then call that JKD.
2.Now to evolve yes if you notice through exposer to other methods A usefulness that you want to applie to your method No one is stopping you from that. But do not just add and add. to add means you need to look at what you need to take away.
3.Concepts leaves you with your understanding of what best meets your needs. That is good is it JKD well know its concepts.
4.Is it if you trained JKD then put a little something in the mix to enhance your performance. Both yes and no. Yes its now your personal aspect for you. No it is not JKD as you should hand down to others. Because you alone made that mix. Yes you can relate it to others in concepts. So they can add or not to there own JKD
*But agin as you add theres a part that has to go away as adding means you found something that better meets the need
*the other then is not needed
:

When I was younger I used to read quite a few materials related to Master Lee's philosophy, and though I am possibly wrong, I think "my style is no style", and other such comments from Bruce, was an attempt to convey his antipathy for being catalogued and defined within one way(hence 'no way').
Bruce was about as 'fluid' as you could be, so my view of JKD is that it is only meant to be 'concept'- a true philosophy of motion and energy in play. Bruce was 'nature' too, and therefore 'change'(fluid), was the way.

The art was not meant to be static, and to 'add' something, doesn't mean to leave something else go. Its not like JKD had a top figure of use-able methods, and if something 'useful'(and new) appeared, meant to disregard what you've already aquired.

I made a mistake earlier, JKD is not a martial art per se, it is martial concept, or martial way. And that is why I have the highest respect for Master Lee's philosophy.
 

Toasty

Green Belt
Founding Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
151
Reaction score
4
Location
Mi, USA
FatDragon said:
, Ted Wong (the man who spent more personal time with Bruce than any of the other original students).

Says who? Ted Wong...?



First a quote from Bruce on JKD: "Only one of 10,000 can handle it. It is complete martial art. Complete offensive attacks. It is silly to think almost anyone can learn it."

Ted Wong asked Bruce what he meant in that quote. Bruce said that most people lack the discipline to learn the simple techniques found in JKD, and keep practicing those techniques over and over and over again, knowing that you will never achieve true perfection. Bruce said the average martial arts student is more confident in learning stances, punches, and set patterns of attack and defense. But when it comes time to use this in a real fight, they are defeated by their own "classical mess".


Ok, what are those "simple techniques"?


Here are some things from the book that reveal the truth of JKD. After reading, you will understand that most of the schools claiming to teach JKD today are completely bogus. In fact, in reading the first statement you can see that one of the most famous JKD "instructors" has bastardized Bruce's system.

"JKD is NOT kali, escrima, or "27" arts"

Wow, pretty tough talk from a chick who never even MET Mr. Lee let alone trained with him...

For over 30 years, certain so-called JKD instructors have been teaching techniques that were never developed or practiced by Bruce Lee. In some cases, they have taken certain arts like kali and escrima, and misrepresented them as JKD.

Yep, spoken like somone who does not understand what the person in question actually does teach.


And for further evidence of Bruce being against the incorporation of other arts into his JKD system, refer to page 50 of Commentaries on the Martial Way and read the tale of X and Y. That was taken from a letter written by Bruce to his student Jerry Poteet, who wanted to mix JKD drills with kenpo karate. Obviously, Bruce objected.

Yeah, that was 30+ years ago - you dont think he would have grown as a martial artist & perhaps incorporated new training methodologies & martial arts (and their applications) or do you think he would have stayed exactly the same as he was in 1973 (when he was far more concerned about making movies - you know... his "chief number one goal) ?
Because his personal history shows otherwise...
 

Robert Lee

Brown Belt
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
425
Reaction score
6
Bruce researched The western boxing concept. The fencing concept adapted that to his wing chun concept. Then he discarded what he felt was not over all general usefulness of the different aspect. And continued to drop certion methods as he evolved. That was anbd is JKD how it was taught to others. Then as they learned they found in that certion structure they to had the pieces they put together That the person found they could use. That part Has No way. but what is it. Its as the boxer is in the ring fighting a live resistive opponent He put to use the tools he has found useful that works for him to achive his goal. JKD is not a concept until you have learned its method of training to aquire the tools that relate to the JKD method. Fighting is fighting when that is what you are doing free from set deliver only options. Not confined to this or that but like walking You do not think of which step first and so forth you just walk so you just act and react in fighting. you have made the tools you learned that worked for you just part of that procsess you have no way then you are just doing what you do. Why take something from say another art if it does not improve over what you are allready doing. And if it does. Ten why do you need that certion tool that the new method helps you to better perform. Discard that old one you have something now better that helps just you. NOW grappling Bruce encouraged more investigation by the students to look into the different grappling arts to better enhance performance there. JKD has an amount of grappling that Bruce put in it. But reseach was not yet say complete to its application. The idea of JKD was to help blend as a complete fighter of the martial arts. All styles of M/A has freedom those that find it are what you see as that better representives of there art. they do what they do make things work it flows for them. Where others do not let go cling to the subject matter That part the subject matter is meant to help train you not set a pattern to how you must use it. The use is only found in the peformance of how you becaome able to deliver what you now have learned. JKD indeed has a method of foundation traing that is soley unique to JKD at its different areas Other arts appied to the concept of JKD are concepts. In the end no art is really style or way. its what you do You the person becomes who and what you are after being influenced by something that brought you to a better way Then yes you can say JKD is perhaps a concept because you are now not looking just at JKD you are JKD But you are not JKD if you did not train in its method its structure of learning
 

Shaolin Bushido

Yellow Belt
Joined
Feb 3, 2005
Messages
33
Reaction score
2
Location
Charlotte, NC
So, are the comments in the initial post a backhand slap at Dan Inosanto? Seems like it was whether it was intended that way or not. Anyone?
 

AceHBK

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jan 29, 2006
Messages
1,325
Reaction score
14
Location
Arizona
Shaolin Bushido said:
So, are the comments in the initial post a backhand slap at Dan Inosanto? Seems like it was whether it was intended that way or not. Anyone?

Excellent point made. I am curious to that myself. It was Dan that taught Brandon Lee.
 

Robert Lee

Brown Belt
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
425
Reaction score
6
Shaolin Bushido said:
So, are the comments in the initial post a backhand slap at Dan Inosanto? Seems like it was whether it was intended that way or not. Anyone?
Seems like part may point that direction and part points to those that have put this with that and call it JKD. BUt every one knows Dan use of what is Concept is not what Dan has taught as Jun Fan/// JKD. His concepts explore The other arts he has looked into and trained in the areas he prefured and offers those to people that want to look further. nothing wrong there at all. Its just that JKD has grown so much in politics alot want there method to be right. As long as Dan has been around most people know the truth to his background. And they have a choice to train where they want Take the politics out of JKD and then it will end the great debate of whos right whos wrong. And Dan is a big enough person not to feed into this bashing Perhaps if more were like him in that aspect The politics would have never grown.
 

Jimi

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
542
Reaction score
11
Location
Beltsville, MD
I would like to read fat dragons opinion a little more clearly. With out naming Dan, that post sure infered him in several ways. Don't beat about the bush, where you saying Dan is bastardizing JKD, or some other instructor with 30 years experience in JF/JKD that turned Kali into JKD? I don't see how much of that post has solely addressed Teri Tom's new book, (that I believe is a compitent work, and more indepth insight into the straight lead is long overdue), it seemed to use the book a an entry to bash this instructor blending JKD out of existence. Do you believe this instructor (I believe you are refering to Dan) has no truth to share about JKD?
 

Shaolin Bushido

Yellow Belt
Joined
Feb 3, 2005
Messages
33
Reaction score
2
Location
Charlotte, NC
Ya, this thread could use a little plain speak ... bs'ing around about famous men who have accomplished as much as Guru Dan Inosanto is just complicating communication in this thread needlessly. Without Dan's dedicated advancement of JKD, it would be about as well-known and widespread as 52 blocks.

I know.

Never heard of it have you? If you have, I bet you sure as hell don't know two people who agree on what it consists of.

Ted Wong. Ted Wong spent more time training with Bruce Lee than anyone else? I've heard of him but not many people outside of Ted wong's immediate family holds him in as high a regard, related to JKD, as Guru Dan Inosanto.

Any kind of JKD!

So Bruce Lee who devised JKD in like 10 or so years wouldn't have included any other techniques, tactics or strategies into it over this last 30 years and no one else was capable of that either? Not even Dan, by your assertion probably the guy who spent the SECOND MOST AMOUNT OF TIME TRAINING with Bruce Lee.

Okay. If you say so. I think the truth of JKD is that there are a lot of jealous little people out there hating on Dan Inosanto, a good friend and chief student of Bruce Lee as well as THE most unassuming, giving and dedicated proponent of Jeet Kune Do that any teacher could ever hope to find and trust to be true to it's CONCEPTS while honing it's efficiency to a lethal edge.

It is a conceptual construct and trying to limit it to just a set of punches and kicks is a joke. Trying to diss Guru Dan ... it's just pathetic.
 

Jimi

Black Belt
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
542
Reaction score
11
Location
Beltsville, MD
I can accept an advertisment for this book, that is no problem. It is the inference that the book reveals the truth about a famous instructor of JKD basterizing Bruces work that I choke on. The validity of this book and the writer do not need such help. I wonder if Ted Wong or Teri Tom know this person seems to trying to speak for them against a man hand picked by Si Jo Bruce? I belive in the straight lead and this book interests me, except if its contents are to prove Dan Inosanto to be- um- totaly bogus. That I can't subscribe to. Just my opinionated opinion. PEACE
 

Flatlander

Grandmaster
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
6,785
Reaction score
65
Location
The Canuckistan Plains
The irony is, the title doesn't accurately reflect the content of the lead post. The lead post is all about what JKD isn't. However, none of that was news to those who already know what JKD is. So, if this is someone's proclamation that they're sharing some great secret, well, that's kind of funny. At any rate, I see no need to further elucidate on the residual bemoanings of an over perpetuated and directionless non-argument.
 

Wild Bill

Green Belt
Joined
Oct 17, 2004
Messages
160
Reaction score
6
Location
Washington
I am not an expert in JKD and I don't care about martial arts politics. That being said I would like to share something that was Emailed to me a few weeks ago.

From the Source...
Original letter provided by Paula Inosanto
Commentary by Michael A. Krivka

NOTE: Following are excerpts from a letter written by Paula Inosanto
to Curtis F. Wong, Publisher of Inside Kung Fu and Inside Karate. The
letter is well over 5 pages long and deals with articles, commentary and
letters concerning Guro Dan, Jun Fan Gung Fu and JKD Concepts. I (Mike
Krivka) have condensed the letter, to highlight some important
passages, and have made notations to clarify information or to identify certain
individuals...

Dan has been involved in the martial arts for over 40 years, the last
20 have been devoted
largely to carrying on the arts of Jun Fan Gung Fu and Jeet Kune Do
Concepts, as mandated
by his Sifu Bruce Lee. As I am sure you will agree Dan's skill,
reputation and credentials
in the martial arts are above reproach.

[In reference to a recent article in Inside Kung Fu ...] I have
included an excerpt from Si Gung [Grandfather or your teachers
instructor...] Lee's notes, "The Martial Way", from his original "Tao of Jeet Kune
Do". Please note that the excerpt on Pentjak Silat is in Si Gung Lee's
own handwriting. This passage on Pentjak Silat clearly shows that he did
in fact investigate the art, as he did every art that he came across.
To quote someone such as Fran
Joseph [A student of Jerry Poteet ...] on what Si Gung Lee would, or
would not have investigated or studied is completely irresponsible.

Perhaps I should explain how the Jun Fan Gung Fu Institute was run.
Dan taught 90% of all the classes, with the remaining 10% of the classes
being taught by Si Gung Lee himself. At the time the institute was
founded in 1967, Dan had already been Si Gung Lee's constant training
partner, student and close friend for three years. In addition he was
already a certified instructor in Si Gung Lee's three arts: The Tao of
Chinese Martial Arts, Jun Fan Gung Fu and Jeet Kune Do. When the school
opened Dan invited his Kenpo students (Jerry Poteet, Pete Jacobs, Daniel
Lee, Steve Golden, Larry Hartsell,
etc ...) to train under him at the Jun Fan Gung Fu Institute.

[In reference to Jerry Poteet's training with Si Gung Lee ...] ...
Jerry Poteet's
actual training time during the Chinatown era was less than ten months,
and his attendance was not consistent during that time. In fact, the
vast majority of Jerry's training in the arts took place after Si Gung
Lee's death, when Dan
accelerated Jerry's training schedule to help him "catch up".
After the death of Si Gung Lee, several of Dan's students were
promoted to
the status of "Instructor". It was Dan, not Si Gung Lee, who promoted
Jerry
Poteet, Daniel Lee, Ted Wong, Richard Bustillo, Larry Hartsell, Steve
Golden,
etc to "Instructor" rank.
[In reference to the many JKD "experts" being published in Inside
Kung Fu and Inside Karate ...]

As for Dr. Jerry Beasley [A professor at Radford University in
Virginia ...],
he is neither qualified nor certified, and has apparently proclaimed
himself
an authority on a subject which he knows close to nothing. Dr. Beasley
is not
a trained practitioner in the arts of Si Gung Lee. To the best of our
knowledge, he attended less than a handful of seminars, during which
time he would merely observe and take notes. He is an "armchair" Jun Fan /
JKD fraud. He misrepresents the facts and misleads the public. It is a
shame the press lends space to promoting this type of individual. [Not
to mention the fact that he is currently teaching a class in Kali at
Radford University ... another art which he is not qualified or certified
to teach.]

Gary Dill [A student of the late James Lee, who was not certified by
Sifu James Lee to teach Jun Fan Gung Fu or JKD ...] is yet another
example of someone trying to "cash-in" on the late Si Gung Lee's name, and
who, like the others, is without the proper credentials or
qualifications

Lamar Davis [An extremely prolific student of Gary Dills ...] is
another unqualified and uncertified individual who like Dr. Beasley, is
merely capitalizing on the name of Si Gung Lee.

Contrary to what is often stated in articles appearing in your
magazines Dan teaches the Original Jeet Kune Do. He is truly the only
individual that knows the roots, techniques, principles and concepts of the
arts developed and taught by Si Gung Lee.

Dan however, will always recognize Taky Kimura as his senior and
fellow instructor, along with the late James Lee.
Dan continues to train a core group of lineage instructor in the arts
of Si Gung Lee, not only here in Los Angeles, but in various locations
around the world. Dan has done what Si Gung Lee desired of him: to
continue exploring the concepts and ideas of the martial arts as developed
and taught by Si Gung Lee. What Dan has not done is sold out.
He has not commercialized, mass-marketed, prostituted or capitalized on
Si Gung Lee, the man or the martial artist. Dan has never charged the
instructors under him in Jun Fan or JKD for private lessons and he has
never charged anyone to join an association or society. Dan has never
"sold" instructorships.

Dan has kept the art, philosophy, teachings and techniques of Si Gung
Lee alive, true to form (and integrity), as well as protected and
preserved for the future. There is no one alive today, with the exception of
Si Bak Taky Kimura, who can stand in judgment of the job that Dan has
done.
The Kutting Edge (MAK) Nov. 1993


I have know way of verifing the information. I'm just sharing.
 
Top