I was just skimming through this thread for the first time. I just wanted to nitpick on one point, FatBuddha, only because this is not really an accurate representation of the I-method:
"I don't believe that you can soley determine an arts effectiveness through SBGI type sparring (how many throws in the Canon of Judo would be rejected if the throw was taught, briefly drilled until the movement was understood, then sparred with? How many of the 40 throws of the gokyo (which we KNOW work time after time in competitions all over the world) would be rejected since nobody could get them to immediately work at all against resisting opponents in sparring?). I do however think that sparring has an important place in evaluating an art and techniques within that art."
Isolation strategies using progressive resistance are missing in this example. They are the key bridge between rote movement and sparring/application, and would be invaluable in trying to develop those throws or other skills.
I think the litmus test for any athletes interested in performance (not just SBGI people) is if their techniques prove effective against resisting opponents. I would go a step further and say that the main focus of one's training should be on what works a high percentage of the time against resistance: the fundamentals. The spinning backfist, for ex, might land occassionally even in pro mma competition, but it would not be a fundamental as would a jab-cross from a solid hands up, chin down, mobile boxing structure.
What is not accurate is to say that the SBGI method would lead one to discard techniques "immediately" after practicing it through rote movement then sparring. Any of the coaches in SBGI would certainly give flight time via isolation and sparring (with progressive resistance) before making such a judgment about a judo throw, particularly if that throw has already been used successfully by many judoka in randori and competition.
This my first time checkinout this forum and unfortunatly im disappointed in my fellow martial artist especially those who have been cling to certain techs or arts. the truthof jkd is not in the techs but in self discovery. you hack away the things that do not work for you. but we want totality meaningbeable to understanding how to relate to your opponent in all ranges but not being bounded by them even the name binds people from some clain to be concepts or jun fan or wheather. bottom line instead of worrying about what arts are lacking concentrate on effientcy because jkd is all arts and it is no art
A comment on the Judo example is that the only places you are likely to find the throws taught like they are in the Gokyo etc is in Dojo that don't compete. It would probably be a reasonable idea to discard this.....
My experience of Judo has been that it is mostly taught in the form that is currently competitive i.e. The Osotogari (outside leg sweep) will be mostly taught with entry and set ups etc that have either worked for the coach against full resistance or seen working for high level guys by the coach....not in the form taught by Kano x years ago.
some do!
just because insanto doesn't teach doesn' mean that it is not done. You have to find your own path. Maybe insanto does personally like those arts but i do know some jkd practioners who go into grappling for instance such larry hartsell. so if you do like a certain art you need to research it that it