BRUCE LEE

[jkdluis]

Hola a todos.
Si amigos , Bruce Lee, ese hombre que revoluciono el mundo de las artes marciales y otras artes, innovador, gran pensador, experimentador, filósofo y punto de partida de muchos practicantes de artes marciales, observo, comprobó y después nos enseño que lo mejor de todo esta dentro de uno mismo, que lo que se es,es lo que tenemos, saber quienes somos y como somos es el inicio para construirse.
Sea en las artes marciales o cualquier otra cosa.
Le falto tiempo para explicarse mejor, pero lo que dejo es de un gran valor, sin duda.
Nada pues eso, leer lo que dijo, ver lo que hizo y entender que estaba en construcción.
un saludo.

[Sajite]

leete ésto:
http://www.sirwilliamhope.org/Library/DDLR/renaud.pdf


y luego dime si fue una "revolución" o una "lacra"...

[jkdluis]

Sin duda una revolución y fuente de inspiración para muchos. aunque no invento nada, si reunio conocimientos que ya estaban para crearse a si mismo y animar a las personas a enriquecerse al igual que el, con sus conocimientos y otros conocimientos.

[Sajite]

Sin duda una revolución y fuente de inspiración para muchos. aunque no invento nada, si reunio conocimientos que ya estaban para crearse a si mismo y animar a las personas a enriquecerse al igual que el, con sus conocimientos y otros conocimientos.

leete el libro ese de 1912 y me cuentas

[Sajite]

con la intro vale

[Jaime G]

leete ésto:
http://www.sirwilliamhope.org/Library/DDLR/renaud.pdf


y luego dime si fue una "revolución" o una "lacra"...

El mismo rollo se entrenaba en españa sobre 1920, ando detrás de algunos libros locales...

Pero claro, no pelearon con chuck norris

[Sajite]

These systems of defence correspond to dieffrent circumstances; each one cannot be valued but in the circumstances which suit it.
The bicycle is of more use than stilts, on a road, but on the sands of Landes, stilts are evidently preferable.
Indeed! Assume amatch where, thanks to a special tactic, the stiltist could take the cyclist on a terrain that suited him, and vice versa! The result would certainly prove nothing for or against the tools, but for or against the intelligence of the champions in attendance! And then, it would have to be that the representative ignored all of the other, and this is never the case.
Padoubny "had" Regnier by a very Japanese leg lock.
Driscoll was trained in London, for several months, against French boxers before encountering Charlemont - who was and is still a good English boxer.
Meekins had for a long time frequented our Parisian salles, and Chabrier - who was his adversary in a sensational encounter at the Cercle Hoche - Boxes very remarkably in the English manner.
It is always thus.
Let us yet suppose that the two representatives of the different methods in each others presence were each absolutely ignorant of the method's that the other was going to employ! It is probably that the first who launched an attack from his special method would surprise his adversary, succeed fully and triumph. Thus it would be to he who attacked first.
Much more chance, not solely the value of the methods but those of the champions, will give the decision!
It is thus impossible to take, from mixed encounters, even the most interesting, the least practical information on the value of one method.
For victory there is merit in unfamiliar components of the methods, and sometimes even, of the merit of the combatants.
The actual drawback is that, truly, the public, always simplistic, take clearcut conclusions from it.

Is an English boxer put out of action by a kick? The British method is worthless.
On the contrary, does the French boxer incur defeat? This French boxing, what a farce!
A Jiu-jitsu(sic) man finds himself put out of action by a boxer, and Jiu-jitsu is but a blu!
If the opposite happens then there is nothing but the Nipponese method, the rest is but a joke!
Yet each of these three systems of defence is excellent AND OUGHTTO BE COMPLETELY ASSIMILATED BY THE SPORTSMAN WHO DESIRES TO BE ABLE TO COPE WITH ALL CIRCUMSTANCES.
That a French boxer launches a kick clumsily upon which his English adversary immediately launches an effective enclosing, the fact remains that a solidly shod and well trained foot constitutes a terrible weapon which, with a single blow, could incapacitate.
That to the contrary, the English boxer lets himself be beaten, punches do not remain less effective in all serious combat.
That a Jiu-jitsu man throws himself into a cross which knocks him out, it remains no less that the Nipponese method is marvellous and it alone teaches real combat grappling on the ground.
"

If an aggressor manhandles you by surprise, try then to give him a chasse-croise!
On the contrary, with Jiu-jitsu you'll get rid of him in a few seconds.
If there are many aggressors, how ever feeble they may be, youwill hardly be able to employ Ju-jitsu, but French boxing will offer you incomparable resources..., etc. etc.
It's a question of Circumstances and also of Distance...
I greatly admire Jiu-jitsu. I trained in it for two summers at the Japanese School in London, under the direction of Myaki, Yukio Tani, Hirano, etc. with enthusiasm, often twice per day. I accord it a very large place in defence. If you were forced to choose between all the methods, I would advise you to prefer Jiu-jitsu.
No matter, if one is not a English and a French boxer, one is not complete in that which concerns defence. The mistake was made, in Paris, to launch Jiu-jitsu against boxing. In London, the Japanese School carefully left the boxers in peace. Myaki and Tani think highly of boxing, and if they accept sometimes, on the continent, to en-counter boxers, they disapprove of such mixed combats which don't prove anything but the superiority of one man over another...
"

"
Combat on the ground
General concepts
We are now going to work on combat on the ground. It's not easy, for the positions are extremely varied, and very numerous are the locks, i.e. holds, by using which one of the adversaries is immediately and absolutely put into a position where it is impossible to continue the fight under pain of unconsciousness or a fracture.
Use of the legs in ground combat
One is not accustomed to using one's legs except when one is standing... Observe ordinary fighters, event relatively trained; one on the ground the don't think of attacking or defending except with their
arms; and yet the legs have much more strength than the arms and their use is not only necessary but is enough to grant superiority.
Speaking very generally, one can say that ghting on the ground is the reasoned employment of the legs; the activity and dexterity of these gives success.
It is essential to acquire the habit of resisting the temptation to make use only of the hands.
Keep your bended legs between you and your adversary, he will not be able to do you any injury, wrap your legs around his body and you will have a commanding position. Wrap them around his neck,
he should immediately give the signal of defeat...
MAKE USE OF YOUR LEGS ON THE GROUND AS MUCH AS YOU CAN!!


Important rules
Recall these general rules:
1. NEVER TURN YOUR BACK.
2. EMPLOY YOUR ARMS AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE.
3. BE ALWAYS READY TO TUCK YOUR HEAD BETWEEN
YOUR SHOULDERS WHEN YOUR NECK IS ATTACKED.
4. PUT YOUR KNEES BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR OPPONENT OR WRAP HIM IN YOUR LEGS.

[jkdluis]

Insisto en que no se trata de que antes de, ya hubieran pensamientos y enfoques como los que tenia el, hay cosas en la vida que son lo que son, hoy y ayer, ciertos principios han estado siempre, lo bueno es saber aplicarlos y punto, eso es lo que hizo Bruce Lee , y muchas más personas.
Bruce lee nos indico ese camino, No para hacer lo que el hacia, si no para hacer lo que el hizo.
un saludo

[Sajite]

lo bueno es saber aplicarlos y punto, eso es lo que hizo Bruce Lee

¿ah si?
¿en qué campo supo aplicarlos?

[jkdluis]

En todos los relacionados a uno mismo

[Sajite]

En todos los relacionados a uno mismo

Allí donde ningún criterio objetivo puede alcanzarte y puedes ser el puto amo de lo que tu decidas...

[jkdluis]

No!! no es así, nada de puto amo ni de verdad absoluta, así lo ves tu, pero no es así

[jkdluis]

Es curioso que hace 39 años atrás , bruce lee se interesara por libros como el que tú mencionas y otros libros de su interes, que utilizo para nutrirse y no le des valor a eso, el solo hecho de hacerlo y animar a hacerlo ya tiene un gran valor.
saludos

[Jaime G]

Es curioso que hace 39 años atrás , bruce lee se interesara por libros como el que tú mencionas y otros libros de su interes, que utilizo para nutrirse y no le des valor a eso, el solo hecho de hacerlo y animar a hacerlo ya tiene un gran valor.
saludos

llegó a conocer la obra de renaud?

[Crixus]

Que es para tí una revolución en las AAMM? Si estás reconociendo que se nutría de principios y pensamientos que ya existían, y desde luego no fue al primero al que le funcionaron. Sería un motivador, experimentador y todo eso, pero innovador? En qué innovo? El Tao del JKD no lo he leído, aporta muchas cosas nuevas a lo que ya encontramos en el taoísmo, confucionismo, etc?

Para mí Bruce Lee fue alguien importante en la expansión de las AAMM, pero por su faceta artística, vamos, que si no llega a existir Bruce Lee, igual hubiese sido Pat Morita en el papel del señor Miyagi, o Van Damme, por no hablar del omnipotente .