Teri Tom's "The Straight Lead"

"So, just to make sure I understand correctly, you have personally tested the straight lead in all of the above circumstances and found that it did not work, is that correct?"

Watchdog, I'm not familiar with you. You only have 6 posts. Normally, I would go into detail with this kind of question, but since I don't know you or the intent of your question, I'll be brief.

I've used the straightlead in most of the scenarios I mentioned.

"Also, as a point of curiosity, from whom did you learn the straight lead, if I may ask?"

Again, since I don't know you, I won't go into detail over this, because I don't know the intent of your question.

I don't want this discussion to be about people who taught me to be a martial artist, because then the discussion will be about them. I want this discussion to be about our opinions, and the experiences that formed those opinions. Let's keep it as a discussion of the book and the subject of the book.

First of all, if you look past the hype and the political agenda I think that Ms. Tom's book is really good. Her book discusses the straight lead fairly thoroughly, comprehensively and is pretty well informed. The subject matter is a tool that has been overlooked and abandoned by many JKD practitioners eventhough it is referred to by Bruce Lee as the backbone of JKD. While I am what you would call a JKDC person in the big picture, my search for effective and useful tools has led me to a greater appreciation for the straight lead. I have experience working with boxing, in a pro/am gym not the martial arts version, and I had good experience with the straight lead. I also use it to good effect in sparring regularly. I think that anyone can learn it, but maybe one in a thousand martial artists actually take the time to learn it and perfect it. Think of all the martial artists in the world, most whom don't practice JKD, then take into account how few JKD men actually spend time perfecting this particular punch and one in a thousand may not be such an absurd, albeit totally arbitrary, figure. Is it the best technique ever? Probably not. If it is so good why don't boxers use it? Well, a lot of the boxers I know aren't that into research and development especially outside their own art, boxing, and probably wouldn't care to much about old school boxing, wing chun or fencing. Likewise, I think it does us all good to remember that the best athletes aren't always at the cutting edge of their sport's technology. The forward pass, the jump shot and cross training were all at one time considered absurd by the establishment. Now they are the norm. Go figure. It's not magic, but it's worth checking out and keeping an open mind.

"I don't want this discussion to be about people who taught me to be a martial artist, because then the discussion will be about them. I want this discussion to be about our opinions, and the experiences that formed those opinions."

Nicely put!

4 Ranges,

watchdog has been around and has pub'd books and articles.


now i'm backing out of this thread.

JKD/MMA:

I think you make a valid point. Like I said, I'd prefer this thread to be about opinions that are based on personal experiences. Your experience is valid because...hey, it's yours! LOL!! If you say it worked for you, that's really cool.

This is the point where I say: How did you make it work for you? What was your opponent doing that made it work? What were YOU doing that made it work?

I ask because, as I said in my previous post, I've never seen it work in a pressure situation.

Then, hopefully, you answer, then I can take your experience into consideration. It's all r&d.

SG:

Thanks for the info.

A version of the straight lead was successfully used by Jack Dempsey and was one of the techniques that made him a great boxer.

four ranges,

Thanks for your civility. How do I make the straight lead work? First I shoot the punch out first and put the body at the end of the strike rather than starting it from the shoulder. It is much more similar to a fencer's thrust in that respect. I also use the diagonal fist at long range, which in my opinion makes it feel natural and easy to hit hard. I also use a strong side forward lead, so I'm using my strong hand to begin with. I use a lot of footwork in my punching to set it up, to control range and a hard push shuffle to add power to my punch. When I was more into boxing, I used to shoot it betwen my sparring partners' hands who incidentally used a more square, what I would call conventional guard. This could sometimes leave me somewhat vulnerable to a left jab or hook over my punch, but this was remedied by making the bob & weave to the left virtually reflexive. I also would quickly retreat and counter punch their left. To use more conventional boxing tactics, keeping your lead foot on the outside of your opponent's foot (I'm in a right lead and he's in a left) is another good way to avoid this, but is difficult against someone in a more square stance such as one used by someone into muay thai. However, high hands and evasive head and foot movement is frequently enough. Also, a fairly stiff punch is also both a necesity and an attribute for the straight lead. Fighters sometimes get in trouble when they rely on jabbing if their opponent doesn't respect it. A naturally harder jab, essentially the straight lead, can counter act this problem. Likewise, the distance covered by correct foot work makes the straight lead an incredibly versatile tool.

"I think there was something a lot more basic to wing chun than the "trapping hands" that everyone in that camp seems to be caught up in. And more to it than just power side forward and explosive speed. I think fundamentally there was a real, different kind of power developed through the wing chun basic form, done correctly."

I think this is 100% correct!

Hey JKD/MMA:

great post. Have you ever tried it against a matched lead opponent? What differences did you see?

Also have you tried it during muay thai or mma/standup sparring?

Thanks.

4R,

sorry, neglected to add that he's not a troll

and it's up to him to post who he is.

"Even Bruce Lee's daughter wrote the intro, which should tell you something."

  • good point Steve Grantham

Calbert:

I'm not sure if the lack of the "power" in the OJKD people is by design or by oversight.

So did Bruce intentionally downplay the focus that is necessary to actually get the power? Or did he not know how to explain it? Those are the questions I have.

I'm tempted to believe that Bruce withheld information on purpose. He was a very smart guy and I'm sure he was exactly aware of how he was generating the power, and it's relationship to the first form. He had to be aware of it if he was actually making the force, even just to make the striking power in his fists. I can only guess that he wanted to make sure he always had an edge on his students. Since he was teaching them all the strategy/tactics/tools, by withholding the actual force behind the techniques he'd always have a basic leg up on them.

I've only come to think about it in this way in the last month or so , mainly from some online conversations with folks around the BUllshdio forum, and working out with a friend of mine who is a wing chun player.

What's your take on it?

ttt

four ranges,

I do indeed use the punch extensively against other people who adopt a right lead, which incidentally is the majority of my sparring partners at this particular time. Previously, I was sparring primarily Muay Thai players, boxers and people who trained mma in the recreational sense of the term. Please don't take my experiences as those of someone who has an extensive fight record and has banged with the baddest. I've sparred with a range of people from the professional to the novice, done well and had my ass handed to me. When using the straight lead in a more of an mma context, what I think is a danger is the fact that the bai jong in its classical sense can be a little hard to sprawl from. However, it is my opinion, and one held by most of the people I know who specialize in JKD, that the bai jong needs to be able to change phasically. Just as we tend to get a little more square as we move into close range for straight blasting or, god forbid... trapping:), the need to square up to get into a position conducive to sprawling is also essential IMHO. Where I train, we practice the sprawl randomly during focus mitt training, even when a long-middle range game is being emphasized. I'm also of the opinion that a lead straight re-validates (if that's a word) the jab in MMA because the added power and structure can make the other fighter less willing to simply take a punch in order to clinch or tackle. This isn't absolute, but it can make him think twice about actually risking a solid punch rather than a probe. Against someone of the Muay Thai pursuasion, I think the straight lead is a good tool because you can increase the distance of your strike and not stay inside the range where muay thai excels for longer than necessary. In conclusion, while I certainly think that JKD players can benefit from the wealth of martial arts knowledge that has been developed in the last 32 years, I think that much of the later LA era JKD is still relevant and has a lot to offer. Deception, speed and power are a hard combination to beat.

JKD/MMA:

I think those are interesting experiences. I'm glad you're honest in that you stick to your experiences, and offer them up without bias. i.e. it worked here, but in some instances it needed adjustment, etc.

I think that the straightlead, as a concept, is very valuable in MMA and in fighting in general. Personally, the way it is taught in the "original" sense, is not optimum, in terms of its structure and set-ups.

I prefer the lead uppercut that comes from savate (not boxing), which is a long punch that sneaks underneath the chin. I think Scott may chime in here regarding this, but I think that the set-up and angle makes it a much more devastating technique. The concept of it being a long lead (like the straightlead) is still the same, but I prefer the mechanics of this, because my percentage of landing this is very high, and the percentage of my FOLLOW-UPS landing is actually higher.

If you want to see a sample of this, check out Scott Elliot's savate link, where Pennachio fought that russian savateur. In MMA, you see it in Randy's first fight with Liddell (the famous one where he makes Chuck's head pop back). If you look closely, the angle is not straight; it comes from below Chuck's line of vision, which is why he gets caught, and why his head pops up and back.

The straight lead is a great tool. From what I have read Bruce liked it for delivering fingers jabs. I have not read the book so I assumes she metions this in it.

edg176,

I think all of the reasons you mentioned are definitely plausable. My personal belief regarding Bruce's power development (and other attributes) vs. that of those who try to follow in his path is that the problem lies with Bruce's teaching methodology. So many times I see Jun Fan guys trying to pull off what I would consider wing chun techniques. They never quite do it as well as a good wing chun guy though (notice I said "good" wing chun guy). I think the reason for this is that wing chun (like most other arts) is a system that builds off of what you've previously learned. Though some would disagree, the first form develops many attributes necessary to successfully use wing chun, including the attribute of relaxed power. Bruce Lee went through many of these basic wing chun drills, forms, etc. himself which I think directly effected some of his later abilities. However, he convinced his students that they didn't have to do all that and they could just "take what works" from a given art and that would be ok.

To me, this is one of the problems with confining your JKD training to just original jun fan (as opposed to using the concpets method of exploring other arts and using those experiences to influence your personal, overall game). I've never seen a strictly jun fan guy throw a chasse as good as a savate fighter, throw a jab cross as good as a boxer, snag an arbar as good as a bjj guy, or control centerline as good as a wing chun fighter (all techniques included in a Jun Fan curriculum). I think you have to train these techniques and attributes in each given environement and the eventual understanding of what tools are necessary in each range is what leads to your functionality. Bruce Lee, on the other hand, expected guys who had never done straight wing chun to all of a sudden functionalize wing chun techniques just by doing the techniques as opposed to doing the drills that build the attributes that enable you to do the technqiues.

C.J.

Good post Calbert!

sg

Calbert: plausible

FatBuddha, you're dead!