revisiting Oakland and Wong Jak Man

[jeff]

I have been surfing around several other Jkd and Bruce Lee oriented forums. Apparently, some former or current students of Wong Jak Man
are claiming that the normally cited version of the story-- Bruce's defeat of Wong, is very far from the truth. There is also the intimation that students and friends of Bruce Lee have been intentionally concealing the "truth" about the fight. It all seems to go back to a 1980 article in a martial arts magazine. I am hoping that one of Bruce's students is willing to come forward, simply for the sake of history if nothing else, and put the matter to rest in the minds of reasonable men.

[Jeremy]

A lot of people have said a lot of things about Bruce, once he died. In the Late 70's people started coming out of the woodwork saying that they beat Bruce in this or that fight. We even have a combined martial arts school in Redlands who states that he beat Bruce Lee up when they were roommates. I have had many experiences whith other martial arts where the person wanted to show me why their dicipline was much better or at least as good as JKD. They have all ended basically the same. I had a man show up at my class with 6 Black belts from various styles. The man was such an easy target, that it was rediculous. I am not trying to stress 1 art over the other, however, because a lot of what makes a good fighter comes from the intesity of their training not just what they know. All that knew Bruce said that they never saw anyone train harder than he. Just my two cents.
Jeremy

[jeff]

I think your point makes perfect sense. I don't believe in criticizing traditional styles, because after all, so few persons actually
carry the practice of martial arts into, let alone through, adulthood, that I would rather see all ma's act together as a brotherhood rather than demean each other. However, I have preferences, and given the choice of studying either jun fan by itself or goju by itself, I would rather
study jun fan. When you add Muay Thai, BJJ, shooto, sambo, savate, kali,
etc. into the mix, it's academic. Rather than "live and let live" many traditional stylists seem to want to disregard Bruce and will try to cut him down to size at every opportunity. It is as if someone only need prove that Bruce lost to some classical gung-fu man, then that fact alone would invalidate all of JKD. Their energies would be better spent training, teaching, and perfecting their own expressions of their respective arts.

[choirboy]

Wong Jack Man claimed that not only did he win a close fight but that the fight lasted over 30 minutes. 2 STATEMENTS that contradict the more widely accepted story. He even intimated that he promised to Bruce never to discuss the fight and it was Bruce that broke that agreement by revealing the story in a magazine. He issued a challenge to Bruce in that same magazine , but Bruce never responded. He hurt his story, though in my eyes when he said that he did not even use his most dangerous weapons because he was afraid that he would kill Bruce. That argument is always used by losers of fights. If you look back to the early UFC's, martial artists claimed that they only lost because the didn't want to kill somebody, or was told that they couldn't use a killing technique. But one thing has always bothered me. How hard is it to believe that a winner of a fight was so pissed off that it took 3 minutes , that he in turn, recreated martial arts as we know them today? Would Bruce be less of a legend if he had lost that fight and used it as an impetus for change? Just wondering

[jeff]

Bruce Lee's teaching seemed to move away slightly from modified wing chun to more boxing and kicking. However, some insist that he continued to train the sil lum tao form and the mook jong form. Did the fight with Wong cause Bruce to reassess Wing Chun, or was it more of a matter of conditioning and strength training? He seemed to become less wing-chun oriented over time, but was that due to the Wong fight?

[Jeremy]

Bruce was not only upset that it took him 3 minutes, but that he was so tired. This is why you here so much in JKD about wasted movement. He also focused much more on physical exercise thereafter. The fact is that what bruce did in the beginning is very much less direct than what he did in his China Town school. Another reason I believe he was so tired, if I remember correctly from When Bob told us the story, was that Bruce was primarily srait blasting the guy, who was running backwards and throwing wide circular blocks. Ever do a strait blast for three minutes? Also even the stuff he kept from Wing Chun he modified greatly. Bob Bremer has done Chi Sao with a lot of hi ranking wing chun guys and he told me he was able to blast right through them. This he atributes to the aggressive forward energy in JKD as opposed to pacivity.
Jeff and Quiorboy, good answers buy the way.
Jeremy
P.S I might be wrong about the strait blast part of the fight. I'll ask Bob next time I see him. Don't want to spread any rumors. :p

[jeff]

Bruce fought a karate sensei in Seattle, and he engaged in sparring with some pretty tough guys (DeMile, Garcia, Glover, etc.)
My own experience of standard wing chun is that there are really two ways of teaching it: as a hyperaggressive art, sort of like a straight-line muay thai, and as a soft art, like tai chi. In my view you are better off to impose your agenda on your opponent rather than simply reacting to whatever he decides to do.
Many of the soft-type wc guys assume that their skill is so high that they can disregard someone's strength. Maybe for Yip Man or Wong Lung it was true, but most wing chun guys can be hit, kicked, or toppled over.
And that leaves out the fact that the classical 80%/20% wing chun stance
is very vulnerable to the shot from a grappler.
Jun Fan is definitely aggressive wing chun. As far as str8 wing chun goes,
I like Sifu Randy Williams(Singapore) and Master Francis Fong (GA.)

[abdul tarafdar]

Dear Forum members,


I spoke to Jesse Glover about Bruce Lee and the Wong Jackman incident and he said from what I can recall that Wong Jackman did give Bruce Lee a fight but Bruce Lee did defeat him and made him submit. He told me that Jame's Yimm Lee and Linda Lee were witnesses to this and that Bruce Lee told him about this when he returned to Seattle on a visit. Jesse Glover was also witness to Bruce Lee's encounter with the Japanese Karate and Judo guy! He actually refereed the fight!

Abdul Tarafdar

[Geoff]

its not the art that let bruce down...it was himself.
a horse is only as good as the ridder.....

[Geoff]

so there was his first limitation he come up against.......he was not as in good as in shape as he thought....so he pursured that ignorance.
so after he developed all that power he called it turbo wing chun...lol
but after many years of training he came to the realization that the key to his improvement was nesercererly in martial arts styles but in the root of ones being....but even after he built all that speed .power.etc he still found that other people where training just as hard... and when he went back to hong kong....people could get him just much as he could get on them.
so after returning from hong kong.....it was reported that he was going to give it "up" altogether but pursured that ignorance...laying the foundation....to be a champion.......so in many ways although most of us could start at the same starting line for the 26 mile race.....it is likely most wouldnt catch up some of the others.......and in bruce lees case he was in front of most.....especially when it came to training.
but because you dont end up in 1at place ......i to can push the boundaires to my own limitations and although i dont win the race it was the taking part that really matters...but its how hard you want to train.......buce was aiming for that higher principle.......where in a way was sad because he couldnt look back as he thought someone would over take him....

[jeff]

I do not relate to the Bruce of the movies from a purely martial
arts standpoint.
Yes, Bruce made great movies, but Norris, Vandamme, and others also look good on camera.
Pat Strong wrote on a forum that he thinks Bruce is actaully
underrated, that he never gets credit for the awesome depth of skill, thought, etc., that he truly had. From a fighting standpoint, Bruce was a true genius and a great innovator, regardless of what he did or did not do in movies. I tend to think that critics of Bruce are trying to discredit the "movie persona" without understaning the depth of Bruce's technical contributions and theoretical advances.
I agree with Sifu Strong; we have yet to plumb the true depth of Bruce Lee.

[Geoff]

just my opinion... mayb some people cant see what bruce saw.... so how can they give him credit.? they do say he was about hundred years infront.. mayb when we catch him up on that 26 mile run people can begin to realize what he was doing and will give him credit... mayb.